ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 1

UCL, INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY

ARCL0162 MAKING AND MEANING IN ANCIENT GREEK ART

COURSE-HANDBOOK

2018/19

15 credit optional module - MA [ARCL0163, 20 Credit version – KCL etc]

Turnitin Class id: 3885651 Turnitin password: IoA1819

Module coordinator: Professor Jeremy Tanner [email protected] Office: Room 105. Tel: 0207 679 1525 Office hours: Tuesday, Wednesday 11am-12pm

1. Overview of course: This module is designed to develop in students the skills of careful looking, and detailed visual analysis, grounded in a strong awareness of the major theoretical issues, which are central to research in classical art history. It will take the form of a series of seminars addressing key themes in the historiography of classical art through detailed consideration of specific works of art in the British Museum and other London museums, where most classes will be held. Alongside traditional concerns with issues of style and iconography, a particular emphasis will be laid on questions of ‘facture’, ‘materiality’ and ‘agency’ which have been at the centre of recent discussions in archaeology, the anthropology of art and art history. Particular themes and classes may vary from year to year to reflect students’ own research interests, new publications and special exhibitions.

Module schedule:

Classes will be held in the British Museum, 2-4pm every Tuesday. We will meet in the Great Court at the Entrance to the Egyptian Galleries.

3/10/17: 1. Introduction to the course: some key concepts and approaches 10/10/17: 2. Geometric Greek art and the world of Homer 17/10/17: 3. Orient and orientalising: what is early ‘Greek’ art? 24/10/17: 4. Archaic art and the archaic aesthetic 31/10/17: 5. The artist: role, agency, individuality [7/11/17: Reading Week – No Class] 14/11/17: 6. Periodisation and period styles: classical and late fifth century. 21/11/17: 7. Death and commemoration in fourth century art 28/11/17: 8. The body and naturalism: gender and sexuality in Greek art 5/12/17: 9. Portraits and identities in the Hellenistic world. 12/12/17: 10. Art and materialism in Hellenistic Greece.

Essay submission deadlines: The draft for your essay must be submitted to me (as word document, via email attachment) by 10pm on Wednesday 12th December. I plan to return the draft to you, with comments by Thursday 13th 10pm, so that we can meet to discuss on Friday 14th in the morning. Your revised essay for assessment (hard copy and turnitin) must be submitted by 10pm Friday 11th January (first Friday of term 2).

Methods of assessment: The module will be assessed by one 3800-4200 word essay. ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 2

Teaching methods: All classes will be taught as seminars in the British Museum. Students will be required to give two presentations in order to complete the course. Students must complete the required readings for each class before the class, and will be expected on this basis to be able to participate actively in class discussion.

Workload: There will be 20 hours of seminars for this course. Students will be expected to undertake 100 hours of reading for the course, and 30 hours preparing for and producing the assessed module work. This adds up to a total workload of 150 hours for the course.

Prerequisites: Students should normally have a good background in classical (Greco-Roman) art. Other students may take the course, subject to consultation with the module coordinator, but would normally be advised to sit in on the undergraduate option ARCL2007 Greek Art and Architecture.

2. AIMS, OBJECTIVES AND ASSESSMENT

Aims To provide a proseminar for the study of Greek art at an advanced level, preparing students to develop dissertation research at MA level and beyond. To provide an advanced level exploration of classic and contemporary theoretical frameworks and methodologies for the understanding of Greek art. To provide a basis in skills of problem definition and visual analysis prerequisite to developing innovative research in Greek art. To offer the possibility studying at first hand some of the major monuments of Greek art through the collections of the British Museum To address a range of key problems in the history of Greek art through close engagement with collections of museums in London.

Objectives Students will develop and advanced critical understanding of a range of key issues in the history and historiography of Greek Art. They will develop an active mastery of key theoretical frameworks and methods of analysis in contemporary approaches to the history of Greek art. They will develop key skills of close looking and detailed visual analysis through first hand engagement with objects from the collections of London museums. They will acquire the ability to identify significant research problems in the history of Greek art, as a preparation for developing their own independent research projects.

Outcomes Students will: 1) Be able to demonstrate a good understanding of the key principles which inform the systematic and critical visual analysis of works of art 2) Be able to demonstrate a good understanding of key classical and contemporary theoretical and methodological frameworks for the understanding of Greek art 3) Be able critically to evaluate existing research in Greek art, and identify ways in which a range of research programmes might be taken forward 4) Be familiar with the range of visual, textual and archaeological sources relevant to the understanding of Greek art 5) Be able to understand and appreciate the range of problems involved in the interpretation of complex, ambiguous and often incomplete data.

ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 3

Assessment Students are required to write one essay of 3800-4200 words. Penalties will only be imposed if you exceed the upper figure in the range. There is no penalty for using fewer words than the lower figure in the range: the lower figure is simply for your guidance and to indicate the sort of length that is expected. Bibliography and captions do not count towards the total word count. Essay questions are listed at the end of each weekly seminar topic. Students are required to submit a draft of their essay, on which they will receive detailed written comment, which should inform the final revised essay which they submit for formal assessment. The draft for your essay must be submitted to me (as word document, via email attachment) by 10pm on Wednesday 12th December. I plan to return the draft to you, with comments by Thursday 13th 10pm, so that we can meet to discuss on Friday 14th December in the morning. Your revised essay for assessment (and turnitin) must be submitted by 10pm Friday 11th January.

Students (e.g. from KCL, MA Reception etc) taking this module as a 20 credit option will be required to write, in addition to their standard essay, a (max) 1000 word written version of one of their presentation topics (cannot be topic from the same class as they chose for their essay). This should be submitted directly to JJT by the same date as the revised version of the standard essay. It will be marked on a pass/fail basis. Mark for the module as a whole will be that received for the standard essay, but the module cannot be completed without a pass for the short presentation report.

Word-length Your essay should be between 3800 and 4200 words in length. The lower limit is a guideline for expected length; the upper limit is strict, and the standard draconian UCL penalities apply for overlength essays. The following should not be included in the word-count: bibliography, appendices, and tables, graphs and illustrations and their captions. Do feel free, within reason, to write detailed captions (not more than 100 words or so), pointing up specific features of images that play a role in the argument of your essay: quite a useful skill for an art historian, and allows a little wiggle room around the word limit.

In the 2018-19 session penalties for over-length work will be as follows:

 For work that exceeds the specified maximum length by less than 10% the mark will be reduced by five percentage marks, but the penalised mark will not be reduced below the pass mark, assuming the work merited a Pass.  For work that exceeds the specified maximum length by 10% or more the mark will be reduced by ten percentage marks, but the penalised mark will not be reduced below the pass mark, assuming the work merited a Pass.

Coursework submission procedures

 All coursework must normally be submitted both as hard copy and electronically. (The only exceptions are bulky portfolios and lab books which are normally submitted as hard copy only.)  You should staple the appropriate colour-coded IoA coversheet (available in the IoA library and outside room 411a) to the front of each piece of work and submit it to the red box at the Reception Desk (or room 411a in the case of Year 1 undergraduate work)  All coursework should be uploaded to Turnitin by midnight on the day of the deadline. This will date-stamp your work. It is essential to upload all parts of your work as this is sometimes the version that will be marked.  Instructions are given below.

Note that Turnitin uses the term ‘class’ for what we normally call a ‘course’.

1. Ensure that your essay or other item of coursework has been saved as a Word doc., docx. or PDF document, and that you have the Class ID for the module (available from the module handbook) and enrolment password (this is IoA1819 for all courses ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 4

this session - note that this is capital letter I, lower case letter o, upper case A, followed by the current academic year)

2. Click on http://www.turnitinuk.com/en_gb/login

3. Click on ‘Create account’

4. Select your category as ‘Student’

5. Create an account using your UCL email address. Note that you will be asked to specify a new password for your account - do not use your UCL password or the enrolment password, but invent one of your own (Turnitin will permanently associate this with your account, so you will not have to change it every 6 months, unlike your UCL password). In addition, you will be asked for a “Class ID” and a “Class enrolment password” (see point 1 above).

6. Once you have created an account you can just log in at http://www.turnitinuk.com/en_gb/login and enrol for your other classes without going through the new user process again. Simply click on ‘Enrol in a class’. Make sure you have all the relevant “class IDs” at hand.

7. Click on the module to which you wish to submit your work.

8. Click on the correct assignment (e.g. Essay 1).

9. Double-check that you are in the correct module and assignment and then click ‘Submit’

10. Attach document as a “Single file upload”

11. Enter your name (the examiner will not be able to see this)

12. Fill in the “Submission title” field with the right details: It is essential that the first word in the title is your examination candidate number (e.g. YGBR8 In what sense can culture be said to evolve?),

13. Click “Upload”. When the upload is finished, you will be able to see a text-only version of your submission.

14 Click on “Submit”

If you have problems, please email the IoA Turnitin Advisers on [email protected], explaining the nature of the problem and the exact module and assignment involved.

One of the Turnitin Advisers will normally respond within 24 hours, Monday-Friday during term. Please be sure to email the Turnitin Advisers if technical problems prevent you from uploading work in time to meet a submission deadline - even if you do not obtain an immediate response from one of the Advisers they will be able to notify the relevant Module Coordinator that you had attempted to submit the work before the deadline

SYLLABUS AND READING LISTS - following pages

Note also last pages of the handbook for information on IoA coursework submission procedures (Turnitin etc) and granting of extensions.

ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 5

1. INTRODUCTORY: SOME KEY CONCEPTS

Preliminary reading – please read before first class.

Required: Summers, David. 2006. “World art history and the rise of western modernism or goodbye to the visual arts”, 215-234 in John Onians ed. Compression versus Expression: Containing and Explaining the World’s Art. New Haven: Yale University Press. [STORE 10-0519 ] Xeroxes distributed; will add to IoA TC Burke, Peter. 2002. “Context in context”, Common Knowledge 8.1: 152-177. [Online] Thompson, John B. 1990. Ideology and Modern Culture: Critical Social Theory in the Era of Mass Communication. Cambridge: Polity Press. 303-13 “Analysing mass communication: the tripartite approach”,, 313-319 “The everyday appropriation of mass-mediated products”. [SSEES: Misc.XIX THO ; ANTHROPOLOGY D 70 THO ] Morgan, L. 1988. "Methods and aims: a definition of iconography", pp. 10-16 in idem. The Miniature Wall-Paintings of Thera: a Study in Aegean Culture and Iconography. (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).(IoA TC 194 - 3 copies; IoA DAG 10 MOR) Stansbury-O’Donnell, Mark. 2014. Looking at Greek Art. Cambridge. Chapter 3, pp. 57-109 “Meaning”.

Supplementary: Tanner, Jeremy and Robin Osborne. 2006. “Introduction: Art and Agency and art history”, in R. Osborne and J. Tanner eds. Art’s Agency and Art History. Oxford: Blackwell. 1-27. [Online – ebook]

ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 6

2. GEOMETRIC GREEK ART AND THE WORLD OF HOMER

Topic outline: What does it mean to characterise early iron age Greece in terms of the concept of the ‘Geometric’ period? Is it more helpful or less helpful the Dark Age Greece? How can we account for the character, and diversity, of Geometric Greek art? How far and by what means can we best interpret and explain the characteristic forms of geometric Greek art? In what ‘contexts’ should we place Geometric Greek art (cultural, social, archaeological)? Iconography, formalism, social archaeology, archaeology of contextual meanings, object biographies, art and text, ritual poetics (Papalexandrou) Key issues for presentations: Abduction krater: Discuss the key issues in understanding Geometric figure painting, with special reference to the London abduction krater and other vases in the British Museum”. Metalwork: To what extent can we reconstruct the significance of Geometric bronze ‘art’ to its original consumers”? Discuss with primary reference to examples on display in the British Museum. Plus contexts Jewellery: as per metalwork.

Key Readings

Basics: See ARCL2007, class 3. Add the following: Osborne, Robin. 1998. “From praying to playing: art in the eighth century BC”, pp. 23-41 in Archaic and Classical Greek Art. [YATES A 20 OSB ; IoA ISSUE DESK YATES OSB; ART FA 5 OSB ]

Required reading for class discussion: 1. Himmelmann, Nikolaus. 1998. “The plastic arts in Homeric society” 25-66 in idem Reading Greek Art. Princeton. [YATES A 60 HIM – 1 copy; IoA Issue Desk HIM] 2. Hurwit, Jeffrey M. 1985. The Art and Culture of Early Greece 1100-480 BC. Ithaca and London. Cornell Univeristy Press. 33-70 “”Origins and promise: poet and painter in the Dark Age”, 71- 124 “The idea of order, 760-700”. [YATES A 22 HUR; IoA Issue Desk HUR3] {Much less reading than it looks, straightforward introduction to key materials} 3. Smithson, Evelyn Lord. 1969. “The grave of an early Athenian aristocrat”, Archaeology 22.1: 18-25 [Online] 4. Snodgrass, A. M. 1987 "The first figure scenes in Greek art" pp. 132-69 in idem An Archaeology of Greece. [YATES A20 SNO – 5 copies; IoA ISSUE DESK SNO] 5. Papalexandrou, N. 2005. The Visual Poetics of Power: Warriors, Youths and Tripods in Early Greece. [ISSUE DESK IOA PAP 2]; chapter 3 on teaching collection – xerox , 1-7 “Introduction” (very good summary of what the whole book is about, and the approach to figurines as caludron attachments), chapter 3 “Warriors: aichmetai” 99-148 most worth reading. (Good review of the book by M. Wilson Jones BMCR 2005.08.23, allows you to place chapter 3 in larger context) All to read introdution plus review; chapter 3 if you have time (will be covered in presentation). 6. Whitley, James. 1991. Style and Society in Dark Age Greece: the Changing Face of a Pre-Literate Society 1100-700 BC. Cambridge. 1-12 (defining the problem), 75-80 (methods for the stat analysis), 137-62 (the analysis for MHII-LG1 = first half 8th century – do not get bogged down in detail, just get sense of how the analysis works; 181-3 summary attic sequence; 191-4: dark age society in Athens; 195-8 Conclusions). [YATES A 22 WHI – 2 copies; plus copy on IoA Issue Desk – WHI 12]

If you have time, the following also much to be recommended: ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 7

7. Powell, Barry. 1997. “From picture to myth, from myth to picture: prolegomena to the invention of mythic representation in Greek art”, in S. Langdon ed. New Light on a Dark Age: Exploring the Culture of Geometric Greece. Columbia, Missouri. 154-93. = idem 2002 “Aiodic innovation in myth: stories from pots”, 156-187 in Writing and the Origins of Greek culture. [CLASSICS G18 POW] 8. Susan, Langdon. 2009. Art and Identity in Dark Age Greece, 1100-700 BCE. , chapter 1, “Art made to order” 19-55, [YATES A 22 LAN ]

British Museum Presentations:

Student Presentation 2.1: The London Abduction Krater (Room 12b, Case 9) ▲Susan, Langdon. 2009. Art and Identity in Dark Age Greece, 1100-700 BCE. Esp. 25-33 “The London abduction krater: Geometric art in context”, chapter 4, 197-233 “Maiden, interrupted: the art of abduction” (See useful review by James Whitley Journal of Hellenic Studies 2010). [YATES A 22 LAN ] ▲Murray, A.S. 1899. “A new vase of the Dipylon class”, Journal of Hellenic Studies 198-201.

Student Presentation 2.2: Geometric Sculpture: (Room 13, Case 1: horses, two bronze warriors) ▲Papalexandrou, N. 2005. The Visual Poetics of Power: Warriors, Youths and Tripods in Early Greece. (geometric) 1-7 “Introduction” (very good summary of what the whole book is about, and the approach to figurines as caludron attachments), chapter 3 “Warriors: aichmetai” 99-148 most worth reading. (Good review of the book by M. Wilson Jones BMCR 2005.08.23, allows you to place chapter 3 in larger context) [ISSUE DESK IOA PAP 2] ▲Mattusch, Carol C. 1988. Greek Bronze Statuary, from the Beginnings through the Fifth Century BC. Chapter 3 “Beginnings” (pp. 31-35 para 1 – thereafter on orientalising). Rolley, Claude. 1986. Greek Bronzes. 59-75. Higgins, R. 1967. Greek Terracottas. 5-24. Schweitzer, Bernhard. 1971. Greek Geometric Art. London: Phaidon. Pp. 127-163 “Small scale sculpture of the Geometric period”, 164-185 “Bronze tripods and other utensils”. [YATES A 22 SCH - 2 copies]

Student Presentation 2.3: Geometric jewellery Room 13, Case 1. {Some of these rather small/difficult to see – may be worthwhile scanning some to present via tablet – JJT} ▲Ogden, J. 1998. “The jewellery of Dark Age Greece: construction and cultural connections”, 14-21 in D. Williams ed. The Art of the Greek Goldsmith. London: British Museum Press.[YATES QUARTOS T50 WIL] ▲Higgins, Reynold. 1969. “Early Greek Jewellery”, Annual of the British School at Athens 64, 143-53 [Online] Schweitzer, Geometric Greek Art pp. 186-200 “Geometric gold bands”, 201-216 “Fibulae with engraved pictures”, ▲nb esp. 213-5 two bow fibulae with narrative scenes in BM = Room 12b, Case 9 ). [YATES A 22 SCH - 2 copies] Themelis, P.G. 1983. “An eighth century Goldsmith’s workshop at Eretria”, in R Hägg ed. The Greek Renaissance of the Eighth Century BC. Tradition and Innovation. Stockholm. 157-65 [YATES QUARTOS A 22 HAG] Boardman, John. 1967. “The Khanniale Teke tombs”, Annual of the British School at Athens 62: 55-75. [Online] {Oriental jeweller at 8thC Knossos?}

ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 8

Supplementary reading: Antonaccio, C. 1993. “The archaeology of ancestors”, in C. Dougherty and L. Kurke eds. Cultural Poetics in Archaic Greece: Cult, Performance, Politics. Cambridge. _____. 1995. “Lefkandi and Homer”, in Homer’s World, ed. Øivind Andersen and Matthew Dickie. 5- 27. Bergen: Norwegian Institute at Athens. Brann, E.T.H. 1962. The Athenian Agora, vol 8: Late Geometric and Protoattic Pottery. Bryne, Michael. 1991. The Greek Geometric Warrior Figurine: Interpretation and Origin. Archaeologia Transatlantica 10. Louvain-la-Neuve. Canciani, F. 1984. Bildkunst, Teil II: Die Denkmäler und das frühgriechische Epos, Archeologica Homerica 2.N.2. Göttingen. Carter, J. 1972. “The beginning of narrative art in the Greek geometric period”, Annual of the British School at Athens 67: 25-58 Feyerabend, Paul. 1988. Against Method . London: Verso.178-87 on geometric art and way of life Hampe, Roland and Erika Simon. 1981. The Birth of Greek Art, from the Mycenaean to the Archaic Period. London Heilmeyer, W.-D. 1979. Frühe olympische Bronzfiguren. Berlin Langdon, S. 1985. “Gift exchange in the Geometric sanctuaries”, in T. Linders and G. Nordquist eds. Gifts to the Gods (Boreas 15) 107-13. Uppsala. Liston, Maria A, and Papadopoulos, J. 2004. “The ‘rich Athenian lady’ was pregnant: the anthropology of a geometric tomb reconsidered”, Hesperia 73.1: 7-38. [Online] Lemos, Irene. 2000. “Songs for heroes: the lack of images in early Greece”, 11-21 in N. Keith Rutter and Brian Sparkes eds. Word and Image in Ancient Greece. Edinburgh Mazarakis, A. 1997. From Rulers’ Dwellings to Temples: Architecture, Religion and Society in Early Iron Age Greece (1100-700 BC). Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology 121. Jonsered Morris, Sarah. 1997. “Greek and Near Eastern Art in the age of Homer”, 56-71 in S. Langdon ed. New Light on a Dark Age: Exploring the Culture of Geometric Greece. Columbia, Missouri. [ANC HIST P11 LAN] Popham, M., E. Touloupa, and L.H. Sackett. 1982. “The hero at Lefkandi”, Antiquity 56: 169-74 Schweitzer, Bernhard. 1971. Greek Geometric Art. London: Phaidon. Stansbury-O’Donnell. Mark. 1995. “Reading pictorial narrative: the law court scene on the shield of Achilles”, 315-334 in J.B. Carter and S.P. Morris eds. The Ages of Homer. Austin: University of Texas Press. [CLASSICS Qto GN10 CAR] Zimmermann, J.-L. 1989. Les chevaux de bronze dans l’art géométrique grec. Mainz.

Background – texts, history Homer Hesiod Pollitt, J.J. 1990. The Art of Ancient Greece: Sources and Documents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 10-18 “Ancient memories and primitive beginnings”.

Essay question: What are the most important factors which determine the specific character of Greek geometric art?

ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 9

3. ORIENT AND ORIENTALIZING: WHAT IS EARLY ‘GREEK’ ART

Topic: What do we mean by ‘orientalising’? Is it a helpful analytical concept for us, a concept which may have been potentially meaningful to ancient viewers, or simply a relic of modern European ‘orientalism’ (Bernal). How far might alternative concepts such as ‘hybridity’ or the ‘intercultural’ help us to understand the character of artistic production in the Greek world of the seventh century BC? How far can we understand the specific agency of the ‘oriental’ components of works of art (technical, material, stylistic, iconographic) in the context of their social contexts of use and deposition in seventh century Greece? Presentations – orienting themes: To what extent do concepts of “the intercultural” or “hybridity” take us beyond traditional ideas of “influence” in understanding either: early Greek faience or early iron age Cypriot sculpture?

British Museum Presentations: 1. Faience; 2. Protocorinthian; 3. Kouros and korai; 4. Naukratis materials; [5. Cypriot sculpture and ‘orientalising’. 6. Monsters – griffins, centaurs, gorgon]

Basic readings: as from ARCL2007 lecture 3 Rasmussen, T. 1991. "Corinth and the orientalising phenomenon", pp. 57-78 in Rasmussen and Spivey eds. Looking at Greek Vases [YATES P5 RAS – 5 copies; IoA ISSUE DESK RAS – 2 copies] Osborne, Robin. 1998. Archaic and Classical Greek Art. 43-52, chapter 3, “Reflections in and eastern Mirror”. [YATES A 20 OSB ; IoA ISSUE DESK YATES OSB; ART FA 5 OSB ]

Required reading for class discussion:

Key theoretical frames 1. Hay, Jonathan. 1999. Toward a theory of the intercultural”. Res: Anthropology and Aesthetics 35: 5-9. [Online] 2. Baxandall, Michael. 1985. Patterns of Intention: On the Historical Explanation of Pictures. New Haven: Yale University Press. 58-62 “Excursus against influence” (though nb. also to skim the previous pages to get sense of the objects he is talking about and why ‘influence’ does not help explain them) [ART C 10 BAX - 2 copies, one week loan; IoA Teaching Collection 3782 – 2 copies] [3. Hannerz, Ulf. 1992. Cultural Complexity: Studies in the Social Organisation of Meaning. New York: Columbia University Press. Chapter 2, pp. 40-61 “Patterns of process”. [ANTHROPOLOGY D 6 HAN – 2 copies one week; IoA Teaching Collection 3781 – 2 copies. {Not as important as Baxandall and Hay, but do read if you have time}

Key Case study materials 4. Counts, D.B. 2008. “Master of the lion: representation and hybridity in Cypriote sanctuaries”, American Journal of Archaeology 112.1: 3-27 [Online] {JT*} 5. Gunter, Ann C. 1990 “Models of the Orient in the art history of the orientalising period”, 113-47 in The Roots of the European Tradition, ed. H. Sancisi-Weerdenburg and J.-W. Drijvers. Achaemenid History 5. (Leiden). 131-47.[ ANCIENT HISTORY F 14 SAN – 2 copies, one week and standard; IoA Teaching Collection 3780 – 2 copies] 6. Hurwit, Jeffrey M. 1985. “The edge of disorder: the seventh century”, chapter 4, pp. 125-202 in The Art and Culture of Early Greece, 1100-480 BC. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. [YATES A 22 HUR – one copy reference; IoA Issue Desk HUR3] ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 10

7. Davis, W. (1981) ‘Egypt, Samos and the archaic style in Greek sculpture’. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 67: 61-81. [Online]

Presentation readings: * = key readings to prepare presentation (remainder is supplementary, for example if you explore further for essay)

Faience: [JJT?] (Room 13; Case – no number – far end, right of Clazomenian sarcophagus) *Webb, V. 1978. Archaic Greek Faience: Miniature Scent Bottles and Related Objects from East Greece, 650-500 BC. Warminster: Aris & Phillips. [YATES QUARTOS A 24 WEB ] *____. 1980. “Phoenician anthropomorphic flasks: a reply”, Levant 12: 77-89. [Online] Rathje, Annette. 1976. “A group of ‘Phoenician’ faience anthropomorphic perfume flasks”, Levant [Online]

Kouroi: Student presentation 3.1 (Room 13: unnumbered case, end of room, right of Clazomenian sarcophagus; GR1888.6-1.27: limestone statuette of hero holding lion, from Naukratis; further right: case with kouros and Egyptian statue; Case 6: GR1893.1113.3 Kouros from Datea, SW Turkey. Room 15: Strangford Apollo: enter, on your left – GR1804.0220.1) ▲Stewart, A. 1986. "When is a kouros not an Apollo? The Tenea Apollo revisited." Pp. 54-70 in Corinthiaca: Studies in Honour of D. A. Amyx, ed. Mario A. del Chiaro. [YATES E 12 COR] ▲Jenkins, Ian. 2001. “Archaic kouroi in Naucratis: the case for Cypriot origin”, American Journal of Archaeology 105.2: 163-179. [Online] (Nb discussing material we will be able to look at in BM) ▲Guralnick, E. 1978 "Proportions of Kouroi" American Journal of Archaeology LXXXII 461-472 [Online] Cook, R. M. 1967. "The Origins of Greek Sculpture" Journal of Hellenic Studies LXXXVII, 24-31 [Online]

Protocorinthian pottery: Student presentation 3.2 (Room 13, Case 1: Macmillan aryballos etc) Payne, H. 1931. Necrocorinthia: A Study of Corinthian Art in the Archaic Period, Oxford ▲Rasmussen, T. 1991. “Corinth and the Orientalising Phenomenon,” in Looking at Greek Vases, T. Rasmussen and N. Spivey, eds., Cambridge, pp. 57-78 Amyx, D. A. 1988. Corinthian Vase-Painting of the Archaic Period, Berkeley/Los Angeles/London Hurwitt, J. 2002. “Reading the Chigi vase”, Hesperia 71.1: 1-22 [Online] *Morris, Sarah P. and John K. Papadopoulos. 1998. “Phoenicians and the Corinthian pottery industry”. Joachim Jungius-Ges. Wiss. Hamburg 87: 251-263. [Online – Papdopoulos AcademiaEdu Page)] [Very good on key analytical issues] ▲Markoe, Glenn. 1996. “The emergence of orientalising in Greek art: some observations on the interchange beteween Greeks and Phoenicians in the eighth and seventh centuries BC”, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 301: 47-67. [Online] {Looking at development of attic and Corinthian ceramic traditions} ▲Shanks, Michael. 1993. “Style and design of a perfume jar from an archaic Greek city state”, Journal of European Archaeology 1: 77-106. [Online] _____. 1995. “Art and an archaeology of embodiment: some aspects of archaic Greece”, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 5.2: 207-44 [Online] Benson, J.L. 1995. “Human figures, the Ajax painter, and narrative scenes in earlier Corinthian vase- painting”, 335-362 in J.B. Carter and S.P. Morris eds. The Ages of Homer. Austin: University of Texas Press. [CLASSICS Qto GN10 CAR] ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 11

[Parko, H. 2001. “Small Corinthian oil containers: evidence of the archaic perfume trade”, in Ch. Scheffer Ceramics in Context. Stockholm.55-59 [YATES P 6 SCH] ] [Massar, N. and Verbank-Piérard, A. 2013. “Follow the scent. Marketing perfume vases in the Greek world”, 273-300 in Athena Tsingarida and Didier Viviers eds. Pottery Markets in the Ancient Greek World (8th-1st Centuries BC). Bruxelles. [YATES Qto P6 TSI]

[Phoenicians]

[Naukratis] Villing, A. 2013. “Egypt as a ‘market’ for Greek pottery: some thoughts on production, consumption and distribution in an intercultural environment”, 73-103 in Athena Tsingarida and Didier Viviers eds. Pottery Markets in the Ancient Greek World (8th-1st Centuries BC). Bruxelles. [YATES Qto P6 TSI] {nb good up to date bibl on Naukratis} Johnston, Alan. 2013. “Naukratis, Aegina and Laconia: some individuals and pottery distribution”, 103-112 in Athena Tsingarida and Didier Viviers eds. Pottery Markets in the Ancient Greek World (8th-1st Centuries BC). Bruxelles. [YATES Qto P6 TSI]

Early Cypriot sculpture Markoe, G.E. (1990) ‘Egyptianising male votive statuary from Cyprus: a reexamination’. Levant 22: 111-122 [Online] Counts, D.B. 2008. “Master of the lion: representation and hybridity in Cypriote sanctuaries”, American Journal of Archaeology 112.1: 3-27 [Online] [Karageorghis, Vassos. 2000. Ancient Art from Cyprus: the Cesnola Collection. New York: Metropolitan Museum.]

Monster iconography: student presentation 3.3 Room 13, Case 1: Griffin protomes; jewellery from Camirus, Rhodes, no 5 – Centaurs. Case 6, bottom shelf, Gorgon Plate, Camirus ca 600, GR1860.4-4.2. ▲Aruz, Joan; Sarah B. Graff and Yelena Rakic ed.s 2014. Assyria to Iberia at the Dawn of the Classcal Age. New York: Metropolitan Museum. Pp. 263-267 Sarah B. Graff “Demons, monsters and magic”, plus catalogue items: 142, 143 (BM); 2723 Joan Aruz “Cauldrons”, plus catalogue items: 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 176ab (BM), 180 (BM), 181 (BM) [ANCIENT HISTORY QUARTOS B 52 ARU ] {Best starting point} ▲?Tsiafakis, D. 2003. “Fabulous creatures and/or daemon of death”, in J.M. Padgett et al. The Centaur’s Smile: the Human Animal in Early Greek Art. Princeton. 73-104. [YATES QUARTOS A 60 PAD; ICS 128D PRI ] {. Nb catalogue also full of excellent and interesting examples – skim to select material of interest for you} ▲? Padgett, J.M. 2003. “Horse men: centaurs and satyrs in early Greek art”, 3-46 in J.M. Padgett et al. The Centaur’s Smile: the Human Animal in Early Greek Art. Princeton. [Just first part of the article for the material on orientalising period, 3-12] ▲Childs, William A.P. 2003. “The human animal: the Near East and Greece”, 49-70 in J.M. Padgett et al. The Centaur’s Smile: the Human Animal in Early Greek Art. Princeton [Esp. for discussion of griffin protomes, 59-67] ▲Hopkins, C. 1934. “Assyrian elements in the Perseus-Gorgon story”, American Journal of Archaeology 38.3, 341-358. [Online] Wengrow, David. 2011. “Cognition, materiality and monsters: the cultural transmission of counter- intuitive forms in bronze age societies”, Journal of Material Culture 16.2: 131-149. [Online] ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 12

Akurgal, Ekrem. 1992. “Zur Entstehung des griechischen Greifenbildes”, in Kotinos: Festschrift für Erika Simon, edited by Heide Froning, Tonio Hölscher and Harald Mielsch. [STORE 07-0815 ]

Orientalising jewellery: Laffineur, R, 1978. L’orfèvrerie rhodienne orientalisante. Paris.*{P?} [ICS 135D]

Supplementary readings:

Adams, L. 1978. Orientalizing Sculpture in Soft Limestone from Crete and Mainland Greece. Oxford. *Akurgal, Ekrem. 1966. The Art of Greece: its Origins in the Mediterranean and the Near East. New York: Crown. {Very interesting view from the Near East; on order for Short Loan collection} **Aruz, Joan; Sarah B. Graff and Yelena Rakic ed.s 2014. Assyria to Iberia at the Dawn of the Classcal Age. New York: Metropolitan Museum. Esp. Section IV “The Orientalizing era: imports and inspiration”. Pp. 248-330. (Excellent set of essays, by Guralnick, Burkert, Graf, Niemeyer (on Heraion) plus catalogue entries with rich array of material). [ANCIENT HISTORY QUARTOS B 52 ARU ] Aruz, Joan and Seymour, Michael eds. 2017. Assyria to Iberia: Art and Culture in the Iron Age. A Metropolitan Museum of Art Symposium. New Haven: Yale University Press. [INST ARCH DBA 300 ARU] {excellent maps; series of excellent short articles from conference that accompanied the exhibition**} Barnett, RD. 1948. “Early Greek and oriental ivories”. JHS 68.1-25. {monsters?} *Bernal, M. 1987. Black Athena: the Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilisation. Volume 1: the Fabrication of Ancient Greece 1785-1985. Pp. 1-74 "Introduction" (key pages are 17-38), 189-223 "Hostilities to Egypt in the 18th century", 281-316 "Hellenomania, 1: The fall of the Ancient Model, 1790-1830" (key pages are 281-297), 317-336 "Hellenomania 2: Transmission of the new scholarship to England and the Rise of the Aryan Model, 1830-60". (CLASS A8 BER; IoA issue Desk BER 5; IoA DBA 200 BER) Boardman, John. 1980. The Greeks Overseas: their Colonies and Early Trade. Chapter 3 “The Eastern Adventure”, Chapter 4 “The Greeks in Egypt”. Burkert, W. 1992. [1984]. The Orientalizing Revolution. Cambridge. _____. 1991. “Oriental symposia: contrats and parallels”, in W. Slater ed. Dining in a Classical Context. 7-24. Ann Arbor. Carter, J.B. 1985. Greek Ivory Carving in the Orientalizing and Archaic Periods. New York. _____. 1987. “The masks of Ortheia”, AJA 91: 355-383 [Online] *De Polignac, F. 1992. “Influence extérieure ou evolution interne: l’innovation culturelle en Grèce géometrique et archaique”, in G. Kopcke and I. Tokumaru eds. Greece between East and West: 10th – 8th centuries BC. 114-127. Mainz: von Zabern. (Critique of Carter 1987) Dunbabin, T. 1957. The Greeks and their Eastern Neighbours: Studies in the Relations between Greece and the Countries of the Near East in the Eighth and Seventh Centuries BC. Society for Promotion of Hellenc Studies, Supplementary Paper. Gubel, E. 2006. “Notes on the Phoenician component of the orientalising horizon”, in C. Riva and N. Vella eds. Debating Orientalization: Multidisciplinary Approaches to Change in the Ancient Mediterranean. 83-95 *Gunter, Ann C. 2009. Greek Art and the Orient. Cambridge. NB esp. ch 4 “Gifts, exchange, acquisition” ____. 2013. “Orientalism and orientalisation in the Iron Age Mediterranean”, 79-108 In Brown and Feldman eds. Critical Approaches to Ancient Near Eastern Art. De Gruyter (INST ARCH DBA 300 BRO) ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 13

Guralnick, E. 1997. “The Egyptian-Greek connection, 8th-6th centuries BC – an overview”, 126-154 in Coleman, John E and Walz, Clark A eds. 'Greeks and Barbarians: Essays on the Interactions between Greeks and non-Greeks in Antiquity and the Consequences for Eurocentrism'. *_____. 2004. “A group of Near eastern bronzes from Olympia”, American Journal of Archaeology 108.2: 187-222 [Online] *Kyrieleis, Helmut. 1993. “The Heraion at Samos” in Nanno Marinatos and Robin Hägg eds. Greek Sanctuaries: New Approaches. 125-53 [YATES K 45 MAR, 2 copies] Matthäus, H. 1993. “Zur Rezeption orientalischer Kunst-, Kultur- und Lebensformen in Griechenland”, in K. Raaflaub ed. Anfänge politischen Denkens in der Antike. Oldenbourg. 165-86 Miller, Margaret. 1997. Athens and Persia in the Fifth Century BC. Cambridge. (Appropriation of the oriental in fifth century Athenian art: makes an interesting comparison) Morris, S. 1992. Daidalos and the Origins of Greek Art. Princeton. (Orientalising as continuous aspect of Greek culture from Bronze age to end of archaic) Morris, Ian.2000. Archaeology as Cultural History: Words and Things in Iron Age Greece. Oxford: Blackwell *Morris, Ian. 1997. “The art of citizenship”, 9-43 in S. Langdon ed. New Light on a Dark Age: Exploring the Culture of Geometric Greece. Columbia, Missouri. [ANC HIST P11 LAN – one copy standard loan; IoA Teaching Collection 3783 – 2 copies] *Papalexandrou, N, 2010. “Are there hybrid visual cultures? Reflections on the orientalising phenomenon in the Mediterranean of the early first millennium BCE”, Ars Orientalis 31-48 Powell, Barry. 1992. “Writing, oral poetry and the invention of the narrative style in Greek art”, in D. Buitron and B. Cohen eds. The Odyssey in Ancient Art: an Epic in Word and Image. Annandale-on-Hudson, NY. 180-5 [YATES Q A5 BUI] _____. 1997. “From picture to myth, from myth to picture: prolegomena to the invention of mythic representation in Greek art” in S. Langdon ed. New Light on a Dark Age: Exploring the Culture of Geometric Greece. Columbia Missouri. [ANCHIST P11 LAN] **Sherratt, S. and A.G. Sherratt. 1993. “The growth of the Mediterranean economy in the early first millennium BC”, World Archaeology 24: 361-378 [Online] Tanner, Jeremy. 2003. “Finding the Egyptian in early Greek art”, 115-143 in Roger Matthews and Cornelia Romer . eds. Ancient Perspectives on Egypt. London. [EGYPTOLOGY B 20 MAT – copies one week loan; ISSUE DESK IOA MAT 7 ]

Corinthian Arafat, K, and Morgan, C. 1989. “Pots and potters in Athens and Corinth: a review”, Oxford Journal of Archaeology 8: 311-346. [Online: interesting, but major focus on later periods] Benson, J.L. 1985. “Mass production and the competitive edge in Corinthian pottery”, in Greek Vases in the J. Paul Getty Museum. Malibu: J.P. Getty Museum. YATES QUARTOS P 5 GET _____. 1989. Earlier Corinthian Workshops: a Study of Corinthian Geometric and Protocorinthian Stylistic Groups. Amsterdam: Allard Pierson _____. 1995. “Human figures and narrative in later Corinthian vase-painting”, Hesperia 64: 163-77 Biers, W.R. 1994. “Mass production, standardised parts and the Corinthian plastic vase”, American Journal of Archaeology 63.4: 509-16. [Online] Biers, W.R., Gerhardt, K.O. and Braniff, R.A. 1995. “Scientific investigations of Corinthian ‘plastic’ vases”, AJA 99.2: 320 Dunbabin, T.J. amd Robertson, M. 1953. “Some protocorinthian vase-painters”, ABSA 48: 172-81. [Online]

Essay question: Martin West commented on Hesiod (1966): "Greece is part of Asia; Greek literature is a Near Eastern literature". Could the same be said of Greek art in the 7th century BC and with what entailments for writing histories of ‘Greek art’?

ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 14

4. ARCHAIC ART AND THE ARCHAIC AESTHETIC

Topic outline: To what extent does it make sense to talk of an archaic aesthetic? What are the grounds (social, cultural, material) of such an aesthetic and how are such social and cultural grounds indexed in the character of art production? To what extent does it transcend - or vary according to - region, genre, material medium, social context?

British Museum Presentations: 1. Harpy Tomb; 2. Laconian Pottery; 3. Sophilos; 4. Didyma Sculptures. {Possibly shift kouroi/korai to her from class 3? Something on symposium and aristoculture}

Required readings: 1. Fowler, B.H. 1983. “The centaur’s smile: Pindar and the archaic aesthetic”, in W.G. Moon ed. Ancient Greek Art and Iconography. 159-70. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. (IoA Issue Desk IoA MOO 4 – 3 hour loan; YATES 70 MOO –reference) NB having read the Fowler, please go to the British Museum Room 13 before the class and take a look at the kinds of materials Fowler is discussing – Attic black figure, archaic sculpture, and think about how far these materials bear out her claims about the existence and character of an archaic aesthetic. 2. Hurwit, Jeffrey. 1985. “Golden ages: Ionia and Athens in the sixth century”, chapter 5, 203-272 in The Art and Culture of Early Greece, 1100-480 BC. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. [YATES A 22 HUR - reference; IoA Issue Desk HUR 3] 3. Förtsch, R. 1998. “Spartan art: its many different deaths”, 48-54 in Sparta in Lakonia. Proceedinfs of the Ninteenth British Museum Colloquium. London: British School at Athens [Online] 4. Carter, J.B. 1987. “The masks of Ortheia”, American Journal of Archaeology 91: 355-383 [Online] 5. Emlyn-Jones, C.J. 1980. The Ionians and Hellenism: a Study of the Cultural Achievement of Early Greek Inhabitants of Asia Minor. London: Routledge. Ch 3, pp. 36-59: “The character of Ionian art”. [ANC HIST P47 EML; IoA Teaching Collection 3785 – 2 copies] 6. Morris, Ian. 2000. Archaeology as Cultural History: Words and Things in Iron Age Greece. Oxford: Blackwells. 155-191 “Antithetical cultures” [YATES A20 MOR – 3 copies; IoA Issue Desk – 1 copy]

Presentation readings:

Didyma Sculptures – presentation JJT? Room 13 ▲Nagy, H. 1998. “Divinity, exaltation and heroization: thoughts on the seated posture in early archaic Greek sculpture”, 181-91 in K. Hartswick ed. Stephanos: Studies in Honour of Brunilde Sismonde Ridgway. Philadelphia. [YATES Qto A6 RID – one copy] {Interesting on comparanda for seated statues, though rather brief on Chares etc} Tuchelt, K. 1970. Die archäischen Skulpturen von Didyma. Berlin: Gevr. Mann. [YATES QUARTOS M 105 TUC] ▲Greaves, A. 2009. The Land of Ionia: Economy and Society in the Archaic Period. Blackell. [ANCIENT HISTORY P 47 GRE; also available as online book through Explore] Chapter 8 “Cults of Ionia - for discussion of ritual landscape context of the Didyma statues; (Chapter 9 “Ornaments of Ionia” for general intro to Ionian art) ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 15

Kranz, Peter, "Frühe Griechische Sitzfiguren: zum Problem der Typenbildung und des Orientalischen Einflusses in der Friihen Griechischen Rundplastik" Athenische Mitteillungen 87 (1972) 1-55. [Himmelmann, N. 1986. “Ostionische Thronfiguren”, in Archaische und klassische griechische Plastik, ed. H. Kyrieleis. 15-20. Mainz: Von Zabern [YATES QUARTOS M 6 ARC – 2 vols] {Comparanda in minor arts} ▲Ridgway, B. 1977. The Archaic Style in Greek Sculpture. Princeton. 121-138 ‘Seated figures’ (125- 30 = Didyma and Miletos) [ YATES QUARTOS M 23 RID = 2nd edition 1993]

Harpy Tomb, Xanthos – Student Presentation 4.1 Room 15 ▲Draycott, C.M., 2007: “Dynastic Definitions. Differentiating status claims in the archaic pillar tomb reliefs of Lycia,” in Anatolian Iron Ages 6: the Proceedings of the Sixth Anatolian Iron Ages Symposium held at Eskishehir, Turkey 16 – 19 August 2004, ed. by A. Sagona and A. Çilingirloglu, Ancient Near Eastern Studies supp. 20, Louvain: Peeters Press, 103 – 134. [Easiest access online – download PDF from Draycott’s AcademiaEdu page] ▲Draycott, C.M., 2008: “Bird-Women on the Harpy Monument from Xanthos, Lycia: Sirens or Harpies?” in Essays in Classical Archaeology for Eleni Hatzivassiliou 1977-2007, ed. by D. Kurtz, with C. Meyer, D. Saunders, A. Tsingarida and N. Harris, Beazley Archive and Archaeopress as Studies in Classical Archaeology vol. IV/ BAR International Series 1796. Oxford: Archaeopress, 145 – 153. [Easiest access online – download PDF from Draycott’s AcademiaEdu page] Froning, H. 2002. “Das sogenannte Harpyienmonument von Xanthos”, Archäologie (Nuremberg) 19: 137-158 (Nürnberger Blätter zur Archäologie) {unavailable} _____. 2004. “Das sogenannte Harpyienmonument von Xanthos”, in T. Korkut ed. Festschrift für Fahri Işik zum 60. Geburtstag. Istanbul. 315-20 [ICS X1076 ISI – reference only] ▲Jenkins, Ian. 2006. “Kybernis (Harpy) Tomb”, in Greek Architecture and its Sculpture. London: British Museum. 163-168. (Full references to the main Fouilles de Xanthos publications). [ YATES K 37 JEN – 1 copy; IoA Issue Desk JEN 3 – 3 hour loan] Keen, Antony G.1988. Dynastic Lycia: a Political History of the Lycians and Their Relations with Foreign Powers, C. 545–362 B.C., Leiden, Boston: Brill.Pp. [ANCIENT HISTORY EQ 60 KEE] ▲Tritsch, F. 1942. “The Harpy Tomb at Xanthos”, Journal of Hellenic Studies 62: 39-50 [Online]

Laconian art of the archaic period (esp. vase-painting) – Student Presentation 4.2

Potentially rather vast: may wish to focus your presentation on two categories of material: e.g. The Masks from Orthia and the Pottery

Room 13, Case 2. Carter, J.B. 1987. “The masks of Ortheia”, American Journal of Archaeology 91: 355-383 [Online] _____. 1988. “Masks and poetry in early Sparta”, 89-98 in R. Hägg and N. Marinatos eds. Early Greek Cult Practice. Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium at the Swedish Institute. Athens. ▲Rosenberg, Jonah Lloyd. 2015. “The masks of Orthia: form, function and the origins of the theatre”, Annual of the British School at Athens 110.1: 246-61 [Online] Cavanagh, W.G., and S. E. C. Walker, eds. 1998. Sparta in Laconia. London: 1998. Coudin, Fabienne.2009. Les laconiens et la Méditerranée à l'époque archaïque. Naples. ▲Fitzharding, L.F. 1980. The Spartans. London: Thames and Hudson. [Well illustrated survey focussing on art] Esp. 24-44 “The pottery” (28f archaic). Förtsch, Reinhard. 2001. Kunstverwendung und Kunstlegitimation im archaischen und frühklassischen Sparta. Mainz. ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 16

Hamilton, R. 1989. “Alkman and the Athenian Arkteia”, Hesperia 58: 449-72 (also discusses Orthia) *Hodkinson, S. 1998. “Lakonian artistic production and the problem of Spartan austerity”, 93-117 in Fisher and van Wees eds Archaic Greece: New Approaches and Evidence. [ANCIENT HISTORY P 12 FIS - 1 copy; IoA Teaching Collection 3984 – 2 copies] Pipili, M. 1987. Laconian Iconography of the Sixth Century BC. [YATES QUARTOS A 70 PIP; also a copy in Stores STORE 09-0713] ▲____. 1998. “Archaic Laconian vase-painting: some iconographic considerations”, 82-96 in W.G. Cavanaugh and S.E.C. Walker eds. Sparta in Laconia: the Archaeology of a City and its Countryside. Proceedings of the 19th British Museum Colloquium. London. [YATES QUARTOS E 12 SPA; also Online] ▲Powell, Anton. 1998. “Sixth century Lakonian vase-painting: continuities and discontinuities with the Lykourgan ethos”, in N. Fisher and H. van Wees eds. Archaic Greece. 119-146. [ANCIENT HISTORY P 12 FIS – 1 copy; 1 lost] Martin, R. 1976. “Bathykles de Magnésie et le ‘Trone’ d’Apollon à Amyklae”, RA 205-18. [Online] Scott, Andrew. 2010. “Laconian black-figure pottery and Spartan elite consumption”, 165-181 in Anton Powell, Stephen Hodkinson, Sparta: The Body Politic. [ANCIENT HISTORY P 29 POW – 1 copy] Richer, Nicholas. 2010. “Elements of the Spartan bestiary in the Archaic and Classical periods”, 1-84 in Anton Powell, Stephen Hodkinson, Sparta: The Body Politic. [Animal iconography in vase- painting] [ANCIENT HISTORY P 29 POW – 1 copy] Rolley, C. 1977. “Le problème de l’art laconien”, Ktema 2: 125-40 Palagia, O. and W. Coulson. 1993. Sculpture from Arcadia and Laconia. [On Order] ▲Smith, Tyler Jo. 1998. “Dances, drinks and dedications: the archaic komos in Laconia”, 75-81 in W.G. Cavanaugh and S.E.C. Walker eds. Sparta in Laconia: the Archaeology of a City and its Countryside. Proceedings of the 19th British Museum Colloquium. London. [YATES QUARTOS E 12 SPA; also Online] *Stewart, Andrew. 1997. “Going Dorian”, 108-118 in Art, Desire and the Body in Ancient Greece. {on mirrors with naked girls and handles, manufactured in Laconia} Stibbe, C.M. 1972. Lakonische Vasenmaler des sechsten Jahrhunderts v. Chr. 2 vols. Amsterdam. _____. 1996. Andere Sparta. Kulturgeshichte der Antike Welt 65. _____. 1989. Laconian Mixing Bowls. Amsterdam: Allard Pierson Museum. _____. 1994. Laconian Drinking Vessels and Other Open Shapes. Amsterdam: Allard Pierson Museum. _____. 2000. Laconian Oil Flasks, and Other Closed Shapes. Amsterdam: Allard Pierson Museum. Waugh, N. 2012. “Contextual iconography: the horses of Artemis Orthia”, 1-16 in V. Coltman ed. Making Sense of Greek Art. Exeter.

Sophilos and Attic black figure: Student presentation 4.3 Room 13, Case 9. ▲Williams, Dyfri. 1983. “Sophilos in the British Museum”, Greek Vases in the J. Paul Getty Museum. Occasional Papers on Antiquities 1, 9-34. [YATES P 5 GET – 2 copies; xerox will also be placed on teaching collection] Brownlee, A.B. 1987. “Sophilos and early Attic black-figured dinoi”, in Jette Christiansen and Torben Melander eds. Symposium on Ancient Greek and Related Pottery 3 (Copenhagen 1988): 363- 72. [YATES P 6 SYM – standard] ▲_____. 1995. “Story lines: observations on Sophilan narrative”, in The Ages of Homer: a Tribute to Emily Townsend Vermeule. Austin. 363-72 [CLASSICS QUARTOS GN 10 CAR – standard] ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 17

▲Kilmer, M.F. and Develin, R. 2001. “Sophilos’ vase inscriptions and cultural literacy in archaic Greece”, Phoenix 55: 9-43 [Online] {nb do not get bogged down: focus on the bits on the Erskine Dinos, and implications for the general issues K and D are raising} Mommsen, H. 2001. “Sophilos”, in The New Pauly. ▲Birchall, Ann. 1972. “A new acquisition: an early attic bowl with stand, signed by Sophilos”, British Museum Quarterly 36.3/4: 107-110 [Online] de La Genière. 1992. “Quand le peintre Sophilos signait ses oeuvres”, Mnmts Piot LXXIV: 35-43. [IoA Pers] Bakir, G. 1981. Sophilos: ein Beitrag zu Seinem Stil. Mainz.

Supplementary readings: Charboneaux, J., Martin, R. and Villard, F. 1971. Archaic Greek Art, 620-480 BC. London: Thames and Hudson. {Best single volume for pictures, Arts of Mankind Series} *Himmelman, Nikolaus. 1998. “Narrative and figure in Greek art”, 67-102 in Reading Greek Art: Essays by Nikolaus Himmelmann. Princeton. . [YATES A 60 HIM – 1 copy; IoA Teaching Collection 3786 – 2 copies]

Sculpture *Dietrich, Nikolaus. 2018. “Order and contingency in Archaic Greek ornament and figure”, 167-201 in Dietrich, Nikolaus and Michael Squire eds. 2018. Ornament and Figure in Graeco-Roman Art. Rethinking Visual Ontologies in Classical Antiquity. Berlin: De Gruyter [YATES A60 SQU] Fehr, B. 1996. “Kouroi e korai: fomule e tipi dell’arte arcaica come espressione di valori”, in I Greci: Storia, Cultura Arte Società. Ed. S. Settis, Vol 2.1 785-843. Turin. _____. 2000. “Bildformeln und Bildtypen in der archaisch-griechischen Kunst als Ausdruck von sozialen normen und Werten”, Hephaistos 18: 102-54 Floren, J. 1987. Die geometrische und archaische Plastik. Munich. Pp. 5-24 on technique Ridgway, B. 1977. The Archaic Style in Greek Sculpture. Princeton. Sevinc, N. 1996. “A new sarcophagus of Polyxena from the salvage excavations at Gümümuşcay”, Studia Troica 6 (1996) 251-64. Keesling, C.M. 2003. The Votive Statues on the Athenian Akropolis. Cambridge.

Ionian Art Akurgal, E. 1962. “The early period and the golden age of Ionia”, American Journal of Archaeology 66: 369-79 Akurgal, E. 2007. “Beiträge der Aiolier und Ionier zur Bereicherung und Gestaltung der griechischen Kunst und Kultur . In: J. Cobet , V. von Graeve , W.- D. Niemeier , and K. Zimmermann (eds.): Frühes Ionien. Eine Bestandsaufnahme. Mainz am Rhein. 639 – 44. [ICS X107D MIL] Baughan, Elizabeth P. 2011. “Sculpted symposiasts of Ionia”, American Journal of Archaeology 115.1: 19-53. Bouzek, Jan. 1987. “Some recent problems in the study of Ionian art”, Listy filologické / Folia philologica, Roč. 110, Čís. 2 (1987), pp. 68-70, I-IV. [Online] Cook, R.M. 1998. “The wild goat style”, 32-70 in Cook, R.M. and P. Dupont, East Greek Pottery, London. Cook, J.M. 1962. The Greeks in Ionia and the East. London Emlyn-Jones, C.J. 1980. The Ionians and Hellenism: a Study of the Cultural Achievement of Early Greek Inhabitants of Asia Minor. London: Routledge. Ch 3, pp. 36-59: “The character of Ionian art”. Isik, F. 2001. “Zur Rolle der ionischen Plastik bei der Entstehung der attischen Klassik”, in Papenfuss and Strocka eds. Gab es das griechische Wunder? Griechanland zwischen dem Ende des 6. Und der Mitte des 5 Jahrhunderts v. Chr. Mainz. 147-62 Villing, A. ed 2007. The Greeks in the East. London: British Museum. [INST ARCH DBA 100 Qto VIL] ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 18

Clazomenian sarcophagi Friis-Johansen, K. 1942. Attic motives on Clazomenian sarcophagi. In From the Collection of the Ny Carslberg Glyptotek, vol 3. 123-43. Copenhagen. Cook, R.M. 1981. Clazomenian sarcophagi. Mainz am Rhein: P. Von Zabern. _____. 1981. “A Clazomenian sarcophagus in Malibu”, The J. Paul Getty Museum Journal 9: 35-40. (Cf. also Rozeik below)

Other Regional Styles in vase painting Amyx, D. 1988. Corinthian Vase-Painting of the Archaic Period. Scheffer, C. 1992. “Boeotian festival scenes: competition, consumption and cult in archaic black figure”, in The Iconography of Cult in the Archaic and Classical Periods ed. R. Hägg. Athens/Liège. 117-41. Boardman, John. 1998. Early Greek Vase-Painting. London. Chapter 5 (141-176) “East Greece: orientalising and black figure”, chapter 6, (177-256) “The Black figure styles” Iwith bibl for other regional styles: Boeotian, Chiot ete) Lemos, A. 1991. The Archaic Pottery of Chios: the Decorated Styles. 2 vols. Oxford.

Other Aspects Hunzinger, C. 1994. “Le plaisir esthétique dans l’épopée archaique: les mots de la famille de thauma”, Bulletin de l’association Guillaume Budé 1: 4-30 _____. 1995. “La notion de thoma chez Héodote”, Ktèma 20: 47-50 _____. 2005. “La perception du merveilleux: thaumazo et théèomai” 29-38 in L. Villard ed. Études sur la vision dans l’Antiquité classique. Rouen.

Archaic history/culture: Kurke, L. 1991. The Traffic in Praise: Pindar and the Poetics of the Social Economy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. **_____. 1992. “The politics of habrosune”, Classical Antiquity 11: 91-120 [Online] _____. 1993. “The economy of kudos”, in C. Dougherty ad L. Kurke eds. Cultural Poetics in Archaic Greece: Cult, Performance, Politics. Cambridge. Frankel, H. 1975. Early Greek Poetry and Philosophy. Oxford. Morris, Ian. 2000. Archaeology as Cultural History: Words and Things in Iron Age Greece. Oxford: Blackwells.

Essay question: “How helpful is the concept of an ‘archaic aesthetic’ in interpreting and explaining the character of art production in the Greek world in the sixth century BC?”

ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 19

5. THE ARTIST: ROLE, AGENCY AND INDIVIDUALITY

Topic outline: The emphasis that should be placed on the role of the individual artist in the history of Greek art has been a recurrent topic of debate throughout the history of the discipline. The issues raised are both theoretical and methodological. The very idea of the ‘creative artists’ has been seen as something of an ideological illusion, of nineteenth century Romanticism, with little relevance to other times and places (Wolff). Even if we believe the role of individual artists to have been important in antiquity, how far are we able to reconstruct individual artists and their oeuvres from such a remote period: German scholarship has been particularly concerned with the attribution of ancient sculptures to individual masters through the technique of Kopienkritik, but this has been increasingly called into question by scholars who argue that Roman copies of Greek sculptures are so variable that they are better understood new Roman creations (Hallett, Fullerton). We shall address this issue through a focus on Polykleitos’ Diadoumenos and the Westmacott Athlete, and also Myron’s Diskobolos, ‘copies’ of all of which are to be found in the British Museum. Vase-paintings at least survive as ‘original’ works of art, rather than being mediated through Roman copies; moreover, many of them are signed. How far does this justify approaching vase- painting in terms of connoisseurship and a focus on individual artists? How important was the individual vase-painter to ancient viewers, and how is this indexed in the role played by signatures and vases, and the ways theiy address viewers? Recent contributions have focussed on the concept of ‘agency’ as a way to overcome old debates placing the individual artist against society or culture as the primary determinants of art. We shall explore the concept of agency, what it might mean in relationship to sculpture and vase- painting, and how far it is something we can meaningfully reconstruct in relation to ancient art.

Sculptors: Polykleitos (Westmacott Athlete, Diadoumenos); Myron (Diskobolos); Kresilas (Portrait of Perikles; Vulneratus deficiens); Mausoleum friezes and individual artist Vase-painters: *Brygos painter (3 = tomb group, Case 6; plus wg jug upstairs); *Sotades (7 ); *Epiktetos (4); Achilles Painter (2); Niobid painter (2)

Required readings for in class discussion:

1. Status of artists Wolff. J. 1981. The Social Production of Art, pp. 9-25 "Social structure and artistic creativity", 117-136 "The death of the author". (ANTHROPOLOGY E10 WOL - 4 copies; Main Library ISSUE DESK WOL) {See G353 topic 3 ‘Artist and creativity’ for more critical theory concerning the artist – 2017, available from JJT, handbook not yet online} Mark, Ira S. 1995. “The lure of philosophy: craft and higher learning in ancient Greece”, 25-37 in Warren G. Moon ed. Polykleitos, The Doryphoros and Tradition. Madison, WI. {Primarily on depictions of vase painters at symposia} [ISSUE DESK IOA MOO]

2. Vase-painting and connoisseurship {3 readings but very short and simple} Whitley, James. 1997. “Beazley as theorist”, Antiquity 72: 40-7 [Online] Oakley, John H. 1998. “Why study a Greek vase painter? A Response to James Whitley’s ‘Beazley as theorist’”, Antiquity 72: 209-13 [Online] Robertson, M. 1985. “Beazley and attic vase-painting”, 19-30 in Donna Kurtz ed. Beazley and Oxford. Oxford. [YATES A 8 KUR; IoA Teaching Collection 3788 – 2 copies]

ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 20

3. Kopienkritik and the problem of individual artist in sculpture Hallett, C.H. 1995. “Kopienkritik and the works of Polykleitos”, 121-160 in Warren G. Moon ed. Polykleitos, the Doryphoros and Tradition. Madison, WI. [ISSUE DESK IOA MOO ] Fullerton, M. 1997. Review of Palagia and Pollitt, Personal Styles in Greek Sculpture. Online: Bryn Mawr Classical Review 97.9.22 {Nb very useful source of book reviews for classical scholarship} [Online]

4. Two individuals? Sotades and Polykleitos. Hoffmann, Herbert. 1997. Sotades: Symbols of Immortality on Greek Vases. Oxford: Clarendon Press. “Conclusion”, pp. 147-150. YATES P 26 HOF – 1 copy; ICS 132H HOF; IoA Teaching Collection 3787 – 2 copies] Burn, Lucilla. “Honey pots: three white ground cups by the Sotades painter”, Antike Kunst xxviii: 58- 70 [Online] Borbein, Adolf H. 1996. “Polykleitos”, in O. Palagia and J.J. Pollitt eds. Personal Styles in Greek Sculpture. Cambridge. (Yale Classical Studies 30): 66-90 If you are running out of steam/time by this point, and the Burn and Borbein just too much, take a look at the The Dictionary of Art, ed. J. Turner, Online, s.v. Polykleitos, and s.v.. Sotades. (Same essays in Gordon Campbell ed. 2007, The Grove Encyclopaedia of Classical Art and Architecture, also online)

Futher reading and presentations

Theory: a) connoisseurship; b) agency. Wind, W. 1963. Art and Anarchy , p 32-51 "Critique of connoisseurship" Maginnis, H. 1990. “The role of perceptual learning in connoisseurship: Morelli, Berenson and beyond”, Art History 13: 104-17. [Online] *Emirbayer, M & A Mische. 1998. "What is agency?" American Journal of Sociology 103: 962-1023. [Online] *Sewell, WH jr. 1992. "A theory of structure: duality, agency and transformation", American Journal of Sociology 98.1: 1-29 [Online]

Vase-painting *Neer, RT. 2002. Style and Politics in Athenian vase-Painting: The Craft of Democracy ca 530-460 BCE. Cambridge. Esp, Chapter 1 “The Greek symposium and the politics of adornment”. Buitron-Oliver, D. 1995. Douris: a Master Painter of Athenian Red Figure Vases. Mainz am Rhein. Oakley, J.H. 1990. The Phiale Painter. Mainz. _____. 1997a. The Achilles Painter. Mainz. *Osborne, Robin. 2010. “The art of signing in ancient Greece”, Arethusa 43.2: 231-252 [Online] Tanner, Jeremy. 2010. “Aesthetics and art history writing in comparative historical perspective”, Arethusa 43.1: 276-88 (283-8 responding to Osborne) Beazley, J.D. 1947. The Berlin Painter. *Vickers, M. 1987. "Value and simplicity: eighteenth century taste and the study of Greek vases." Past and Present 116, 98-137 [Online] Padgett, J. Michael. 2017. The Berlin Painter and His World: Athenian Vase-Painting in the Early Fifth Century BC. Princeton: New Jersey. [Yates Qto P30 PAD]; excellent chapter on connoisseurship by Arrington; interesting chapter by Saunders on distribution of his vases. Hedreen, Guy 2016. The Image of the Artist in Archaic and Classical Greece. Cambridge [YATES P5 HED; also available Online] Boss, Martin. 1997. “Preliminary sketches on Attic red-figured vases of the early fifth century BC”, in W.D.E Colson et al eds. Athenian Potters and Painters. Oxford. 345-351 ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 21

Smith, H.L. 2017. On black ground: the Berlin Painter at Princeton (review of Padgett 2017). Arion 25, 213-36.

Brygos Painter – presentation? Cambitoglou, A. 1968. The Brygos Painter. Sydney. Williams, D. 1982. “An oinoche in the British Museum and the Brygos painter’s work on white ground”, Jb. Berlin Mus. xxiv: 17-40. [Online] (Vase is in the Greek and Roman Life Room, 69, upper floor) Beazley, J.D. 1953. “Brygan symposia”, Studies Presented to David Moore Robinson. St. Louis, MO. 74-83. YATES QUARTOS A 6 ROB – vol 1 Robertson, Martin. 1992. The Art of Vase Painting in Classical Athens. Cambridge. 93-100

Amasis Painter – Presentation? Room 13, Case 8: GR18427-28785 (Vase B524); GR1849.0620.5 (Vase B471); GR1867.5-6.38 (Vase B52) Bibliography – Amasis painter and his world – catalogue and conference

Epiktetos – Student presentation 5.1 Room 14 Case 1: Bilingual eye-cup, GR1842.4-7.23; red-figure plate with archer, GR1837.6-9.59. Room 15, {Case 4: Red-figure plate, an Athenian knight – GR1867.6-9.78 – removed 2018}; Case 7: Plate signed by Epiktetos as painter, GR1967.5-8.1022 [Cohen, B. 1991. “The literate potter: a tradition of incised signatures on Attic vases”, Metropolitan Museum Journal 26: 49-95 [Online] ▲Lissarague, Francois. 1994. “Epiktetos egraphsen: the writing on the cup”, 12-27 in Simon Goldhill and Robin Osborne eds. Art and Text in Ancient Greek Culture. {Discussing Epiktetos cup in BM: nb if this is still not on display in Room 15, I will bring pictures for the presentation. GR1843.1103.9 – currently room 20a, case 2, vases reserve} Robertson, Martin. 1992. The Art of Vase-Painting in Classical Athens. Cambridge. Index: s.v. Epictetus. ▲_____. 1975. A History of Greek Art. Cambridge. 214-237 “Red figure vase painting and the pioneers of the new style”, (esp. 218-220, 232-3, 238 on Epictetus). ▲Osborne, Robin. 2010. “The art of signing in ancient Greece”, Arethusa 43.2: 231-252 [Online] Cook, R.M. 1971. “Epoiesen on Greek vases”, Journal of Hellenic Studies 91: 137-8 Beazley, J. 1989. Greek Vases: Lectures. (ed. D. Kurtz). 39-59 “Potter and painter in ancient Athens”. Robertson, Martin. 1972. “Epoiesen on Greek vases: other considerations”, Journal of Hellenic Studies 92: 180-3 Seeberg, Axel. 1994. “Epoiesen, egraphsen and the organization of the vase trade”, Journal of Hellenic Studies 114: 162-4

Sotades – Student Presentation 5.2 Room 15. Case 6: sphinx rhyton, GR1873.8-20.265; ram’s head, GR1873.80-20.271. Case 7: mastoid, three white ground cups; astragal normally also displayed here – JJT will bring picture if not on display (currently Room 69, Case 22). ▲Hoffmann, Herbert. 1997. Sotades: Symbols of Immortality on Greek Vases. Oxford: Clarendon Press. **Esp. “Conclusion”, pp. 147-150. Also: 1-17 “Introduction: the vases of Sotades” (gives you general idea of Hoffmann’s approach). 77-88 “Kekrops and the Sphinx” (focus on Sphinx plastic vase in BM), 106-112 “Astragalos” (focus on astragal vessel in BM); [YATES P 26 HOF] ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 22

▲Williams, D. “Sotades, plastic and white” in S. Keay and S. Moser eds. Greek Art in View: Studies in Honour of Brian Sparkes. Exeter: Oxbow. 95-120 ▲Burn, Lucilla. “Honey pots: three white ground cups by the Sotades painter”, Antike Kunst xxviii: 58-70 [Online] ▲True, Marion. 2006, “Athenian potters and the production of plastic vases”, 240-249, 282-287 in B. Cohen The Colours of Clay: Special Techniques in Greek Vases. Malibuu: Getty. [YATES QUARTOS P 5 COH] Robertson, Martin. 1992. The Art of Vase-Painting in Classical Athens. Cambridge. 185-90 ▲Williams, D. 2006. “The Sotades tomb” in B. Cohen The Colours of Clay: Special Techniques in Greek Vases. Malibu: Getty. 292-316 Tsingarida, A. 2003. “Des offrandes pour l’eternité. Les vases de la ‘Tombe Sotades’”, in P. Rouillard and A. Verbanck-Piérard eds. Le vase grec et ses destins. Mariemont. 67-74 Tsingarida, A. 2012. “White ground cups in fifth century graves: a distinctive use of burial offerings in classical Athens”, in B. Bundgaard-Rasmussen and St. Schierup eds. Red-figure pottery in its ancient settings. Copenhagen. 44-58 [YATES P30 SCH] Kahil, L. 1972. “Un nouveau vase plastique du potier Sotades au Musée du Louvre”, Revue Archéologique : 271-84 [Online]

Baron D’Hancarville and the Invention of Vase Painting (Enlightement Gallery) [presentation?JJT] * Vickers, M. 1987. "Value and simplicity: eighteenth century taste and the study of Greek vases." Past and Present 116, 98-137 [Online] *Jenkins, Ian. 1988. “Adam Buck and the vogue for Greek vases”, Burlington Magazine 130: 448-457 [Online] Burns, Lucilla. 2003. “Words and pictures: Greek vases and their classification”, pp. 140-149 in Kim Sloan ed. Enlightenment: Discovering the World in the Eighteenth Century. London: British Museum Press. [INST ARCH MA 42.1 Qto SLO; ISSUE DESK IOA SLO 1] Jenkins, Ian and Kim Sloan. 1996. Vases and Volcanoes: Sir William Hamilton and His Collection. London: British Museum Press. Esp. Ch 3 (40-64, Jenkins) “Contemporary minds: William Hamilton’s affair with antiquity. Plus the following catalogue sections: 139-145 “Collecting vases”, 146-8 “The publication of the first vase collection”, 149-59 “D’Hancarville’s ‘Exhbition’ of Hamilton’s vases, 176-176-181 “Sir Joshua Reynolds’s portraits of Hamilton”,

Broader contexts for uses of vases: Lissarague, Francois. 1990. The Aesthetics of the Greek Banquet: Images of Wine and Ritual. Princeton. Lissarrague, F. 1990. "Around the Krater : an Aspect of Banquet Imagery", pp. 196-209 in O. Murray ed. Sympotica. (TC MAIN 884) Smith, Tyley Jo. 2012. “Greek vases: from personalities to contexts”, American Journal of Archaeology 116: 549-54 (review of recent publications) Oakley, John H. 2009. “Greek vase painting”, American Journal of Archaeology 113.4: 599-267 (state of the field article)

Sculpture: presentations NB for purpose of essay plenty of other sculptors one might look at, amongst whom Praxiteles probably the most important, Lysippos also.

Myron – Diskobolos [Student Presentation 5.3 2016] Room 23. 2018 not on display – JJT bring pictures. ▲Robertson, Martin. 1975. A History of Greek Art. Cambridge. Pp. 339-344. [YATES Qto A20 ROB - 2 copies, one reference only] ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 23

▲Carpenter, Rhys. 1941. “Observations on familiar statuary in Rome”, Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome xviii: 1-110 (pp. 3-25 on Myron copies). [Online] ▲Neer, Richard. 2010. The Emergence of the Classical Style in Greek Sculpture. Chicago. Pp. 89-91 “As the shining moon in the mid-month night sky” (aesthetics of thauma, wonder, in relation to Diskobolos). [YATES Qto M25 NEE – 1 copy] ▲Thliveri, H. 2010. “The discobolus of Myron, narrative appeal and three dimensionality”, in F. MacFarlane and C. Morgan eds. Exploring Ancient Sculpture: Essays in Honour of Geoffrey Waywell. London: Institute of Classical Studies. [YATES M 6 WAY – 1 copy] Anguissola, Anna. 2004. “Roman copies of of Myron’s Diskobolus”, Journal of Roman Archaeology 18.2: 317-336. [IoA Perodicals] Jenkins, Ian. 2012. The Discobolus. London: British Museum. (Excellent short volume from Objects in Focus series).

Polykleitos – esp. Diadoumenos, Westmacott Athlete Student Presentation 5.4 Room 23: {Alas both Didoumenos and Westmacott athlete off display 9. 2017; JJT will bring pictures; could also focus discussion round the Farnese Diadoumenos, by Phidias (?) as a kind of proxy for the Westmacott athlete – GR 1964,1021.4} ▲Robinson, P.M. 1936. “The Cyniscus of Polyclitus”, Art Bulletin 133-49. [Online] ▲Borbein, Adolf H. 1996. “Polykleitos”, in O. Palagia and J.J. Pollitt eds. Personal Styles in Greek Sculpture. Cambridge. (Yale Classical Studies 30): 66-90. [YATES M 20 PAL, 1 copy] ▲Stewart, A.F. 1978. “The canon of Polykleitos: a question of evidence”, Journal of Hellenic Studies 98: 122-31. [Online] Himmelmann, Nikolaus. 1998. “The stance of the Polykleitan Diadoumenos”, 156-186 in idem Reading Greek Art. Princeton. ▲Ridgway, Brunilde S. 1995. “Paene ad exemplum: Polykleitos’ other works”, in Warren G. Moon ed. Polykleitos, the Doryphoros and Tradition. 177-199. Hafner, G. 1955. Zum Epheben Westmacott. Heidelberg. Amandry, P. 1957. “A propos de Polyclète: statues d’olympioniques et carriére de sculpteurs”, Charites. Bonn. 63-87. [Gordon, D.E. and D.E.L. Cunningham. 1962, “Polykleitos’ Diadoumenos: measurement and animation”, Art Quarterly, summer issues, 128-42.] Sengoku-Haga, Kyoko et al. 2017. “Polykleitos and his followers at work: how the Doryphoros was used”, 87-93 in Jens Daehner et al eds. Artistry in Bronze: the Greeks and their Legacy. Los Angeles: Getty Museu, [YATES Qto M130 DAE]

[Kresilas –Wounded Warrior, Portrait of Perikles – Room 15] Richter, Gisela. 1970 (4th ed). Sculpture and Sculptors of the Greeks. Phaidon. Pp. 178-81 “Kresilas”

Fourth Century Sculptors

Unfortunately no examples of note in the British Museum, but if you do the essay, you should probably take a look at both Lysippos and Praxiteles, on whom you can find good essays in Palagia and Pollitt Personalities in Greek Sculpture.

The sculptures of the Mausoleum have also been approached in terms of identification of individual hands, sometimes connected with famous names (Cook, but criticising), sometimes not (Higgs).

ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 24

Cook, B.F. 1989. “The sculptors of the Mausoleum friezes”, in T. Linders and P. Hellström eds. Architecture and Society in Hekatomnid Caria. Proceedings of the Uppsala Symposium, 1987. Boreas 17. Uppsala. 31-41. Higgs, Peter. 2008. “Late classical Asia Minor: dynasts and their tombs”, in O. Palagia ed. Greek Sculpture: Functions, Materials and Techniques in the Archaic and Classical Periods. Cambridge.163-207.

Copies, Kopienkritik and Criticism of Kopienkritik

Marvin, Miranda. 2007. The Language of the Muses: the Dialogue between Roman and Greek Sculpture. Getty; esp. chapter 7 “The modern copy myth” (121-167). (Chapters 8 and 9 also interesting, developing the alternative view that we should look at Roman copies as ‘emulative’ of Greek art, and demonstrating ‘originality) Perry, Ellen. 2005. The Aesthetics of Emulation in the Visual Arts of Ancient Rome. Cambridge. Esp, ch 3 “Kopienkritik and the concept of the ‘free copy’”.

Sculptors as individuals Furtwangler, A. 1895. Masterpieces of Greek Sculpture. (Trans. E. Strong). **Pollit and Palagia (plus review by Fullerton BMCR 9.3.265-71 good on Kopienkritik) **Schultz, P. 2007. “Style and agency in an age of transition”, in S. Goldhill and R. Osborne eds. Rethinking Revolutions through Ancient Greece. 144-187 [ANCIENT HISTORY P 72 GOL] [PDF available for download on his AcademiaEdu page] Schultz , P. 2009. “Accounting for Agency at Epidauros: A Note on IG IV2 102 AI–BI and the Economies of Style”. In Structure, Image, Ornament: Architectural Sculpture in the Greek World, edited by P. Schultz and R. von den Hoff, 70–8. Oxford and Oakville, Conn.: Oxbow. *Stewart, A.F. 1990. Greek Sculpture: an Exploration. Part I: “The sculptor’s world”, 19-103. (esp. 4 “The market”, 56-65, 5 “Rewards”, 65-73, 7 “Personalities” 86-99. Carpenter, R.1960. Greek Sculpture: a Critical Review. Chicago. Cf. p. v: “An anonymous product of an impersonal craft” *Tanner, Jeremy. 2006. The Invention of Art History in Ancient Greece: Religion, Society and Artistic Rationalisation, chapter 4 (pp. 141-204) “Artists and agency in classical Greece”. Symenoglou, Sarantis. 2004. “A new analysis of the Parthenon frieze”, in The Parthenon and its Sculptures ed. M.B. Cosmopoulos. Cambridge. 5-42 {looking at possibilities of attribution/identification of individual artist} Volkommer, Rainer. 2014. “Greek and Roman artists”, in The Oxford Handbook of Greek and Roman Architecture. [Online]

Essay topic: How far is a focus on the individual artist appropriate in studying the history of Greek sculpture and vase-painting? You may, if you wish, choose to focus on either vase-painting, or sculpture, or both: former choice allows greater depth in the specific medium; latter choice allows possibility of playing the two media off against each other.

ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 25

6. PERIODISATION AND PERIOD STYLES: CLASSICAL AND LATE FIFTH CENTURY

Topic outline: To what extent are notions of ‘period style’ helpful in understanding the history of Greek art, particularly in the second half of the fifth century. How can one characterise period styles? How should one interpret their significance and explain their origins, characteristics and transformation? How important are the specifically material, factural, features of objects like the Parthenon sculptures, the Bassai Freize or Meidian vase-paintings to their ‘expressive-aesthetic agency’ (and what might we mean by that?)? The high classical style associated with the Parthenon is often thought of as embodying the essence of Greek identity, the telos to which Greek art developed, creating a specifically western (individualistic, democratic) sensibility, radically distinct from the oriental styles out of which Greek art had emerged. How far does a comparison of the processions of the Parthenon frieze with those of the processional friezes from Persepolis bear out or complicate this picture? How far does the continuing appropriation of oriental elements into Greek art undermine the idea that the classical period represents a radical departure from the oriental influences of archaic Greek art? In so far as the Parthenon sculptures do construct a specific ethnic identity, how far is that identity a Greek one, how far an Athenian (or Ionic) one? To what extent is our perception of these sculptures irremediably shaped by their modern reception, and modern attitudes to ‘the classical’. For the high classical style we will focus on the Parthenon sculptures, and in particular the frieze, supplemented with some examples of vase-painting. For late fifth century , the Bassai Frieze and the vase-paintings of the Meidias painter and his circle. Presentations: 1. Style and techne on the Parthenon frieze; 2. Athens versus Persia in fifth century art: the Acropolis, Persepolis and Perserie. 3. Bassai Frieze. 4. Meidias painter and late fifth century vase painting. 5. The Duveen Gallery: Classical style as modern construct

Key readings required for class discussion: 1. Schapiro, M. 1951. "Style", pp. 287-312 in A.L. Kroeber ed. Anthropology Today. (IoA TC 1847 - 4 copies) 2. Pollitt, J. 1972. Art and Experience in Classical Greece, pp. 64-110 “The world under control: the classical moment 450-430 BC”, 111-135 “The world beyond control: the later fifth century, 430-400 BC” (YATES A25 POL) = basics 3. Hallett, C. 1986. "The Origins of the Classical Style in Sculpture." Journal of Hellenic Studies 106, 71-84 (UCL Electronic Periodicals) 4. Root, M.C. 1985, “The Parthenon frieze and the Apadana reliefs at Persepolis: reassessing a programmatic relationship”, American Journal of Archaeology 89: 103-20 [Online] [Nb you can find excellent casts – and some original slabs – of the Apadana Reliefs in the BM in Room 51-2, nb also the staircase on entrance to52. Please go and take a look at them before class, so you can have them in mind for when we discuss in relation to Parthenon sculptures]. 5. Prettejohn, E. 2012. The Modernity of Ancient Sculpture: Greek Sculpture and Modern Art from Winckelmann to Picasso. London: Tauris. Chapter 1 (38-103) “The discovery of Greek sculpture”. [IoA Teaching Collection 3844 – 2 copies] [ART FA20 PRE] Pages to concentrate on: 38-54, 76-103] 6. Younger, J.G. 2004. “Works sections and repeating patterns in the Parthenon frieze”, in The Parthenon and its Sculptures ed. M.B. Cosmopoulos. Cambridge. 63-85. [IoA Teaching Collection 3843 – 2 copies; YATES M32 COS] 7. Kuhrt, A. 1998. Review of Miller, in Phoenix 52: 366-70 [Online]

Basic background: Robertson, Martin. 1981. A Shorter History of Greek Art. Cambridge. 90-130 “The classical moment”. ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 26

Pollitt, J. 1972. Art and Experience in Classical Greece, pp. 64-110 “The world under control: the classical moment 450-430 BC”, 111-135 “The world beyond control: the later fifth century, 430-400 BC” (YATES A25 POL)

General: the question of style * Davis, Whitney. 1990. "Style and history in art history", pp. 18-31 in M.W. Conkey and C.A. Hastorf eds. The Uses of Style in Archaeology. (IoA AH CON - 4 copies; Issue Desk IOA CON3 - 2 copies) Kroeber, A.L. 1963. Style and Civilizations. Berkeley: University of California Press. [A.D. Hall and R.E. Hagen, "Definition of a system" in Joseph A Litterer ed. Organizations, Systems, Control and Adaptation vol 2, New York: Wiley 1969, pp. 3406 *Pasztory, E. 1989. “Identity and difference: the uses and meanings of ethnic styles”, in S.J. Barnes and W.S. Melion eds. Cutural Differentiation and Cultural Identity in the Visual Arts. Studies in the History of Art 27. Washington. 15-39 [Online]

The Classical Style

Classical Style in sculpture Carpenter, R. 1960. Greek Sculpture. v-viii “Foreword”, 86-109 “The formation of a classic style”, 109-51 “Classic drapery” (key pages: 122-35, 139-51), 153-60 “High classic” (stop at p. 160 – remainder is on 4th century). (IoA: Issue Desk CAR 4; YATES M20 CAR) Leoussi, Athena. 2001. “Myths of ancestry”, Nations and Nationalism 7: 467-486 [Online] Neer, Richard. 2010. The Emergence of the Classical Style In Greek Sculpture. (YATES QUARTOS M 25 NEE). [The latest word, and extremely interesting] Harrison, E. 1989. “Hellenic identity and Athenian identity in the fifth century BC”, Studies in the History of Art, Vol. 27, Symposium Papers XII: Cultural Differentitation and Cultural Identity in the Visual Arts (1989), pp. 40-61. [Online] Ashmole, Bernard. 1972. Architect and Sculptor in Classical Greece. London: Phaidon. 90-115 “The Parthenon: the metopes and pediments, problems practical and artistic”, 116-146 “The Parthenon: the frieze – questions still unanswered”.

Classical style in vase-painting. Robertson, Martin. 1992. The Art of Vase-Painting in Classical Athens. Cambridge. 191-220 “High classical”, 221-234 “Developments from the high classical”, 235-264 “The later fifth century; developments into the fourth”.

Presentations:

Making and meaning on the Parthenon frieze - student presentation 6.1 Room 18 ▲Neils, Jennifer. 2001. The Parthenon Frieze. Cambridge. Ch. 2, pp. 33-72 “Paradeigma: designing the frieze”, **Ch 3, pp. 73-94: “Techne: carving the frieze”, Ch 4, pp. 95-123 “Mimesis: the high classical style” YATES M 32 NEI – 2 copies, 1 week] ▲Younger, J.G. 2004. “Works sections and repeating patterns in the Parthenon frieze”, in The Parthenon and its Sculptures ed. M.B. Cosmopoulos. Cambridge. 63-85. ▲Osborne, R. 1987. "The Viewing and Obscuring of the Parthenon Frieze", Journal of Hellenic Studies 107, 98-105 [Online] Pollitt, J. 1997. “The meaning of the Parthenon frieze”, 51-65 in The Interpretation of Architectural Sculpture in Greece and Rome. Studies in the History of Art 49, ed. D. Buitron-Oliver. Washington DC.

ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 27

Athens and Persia- [presentation? JJT?] ▲Lawrence, A.W. 1951. “The Acropolis and Persepolis”, Journal of Hellenic Studies 71: 111-119. [Online] ▲Root, M.C. 1985, “The Parthenon frieze and the Apadana reliefs at Persepolis: reassessing a programmatic relationship”, American Journal of Archaeology 89: 103-20 [Online] ▲Miller, Margaret C. 1997. Athens and Persia in the Fifth Century BC: a Study in Cultural Receptivity. Cambridge. *Chapter 6 “Persian gold and attic clay” (135-152), Chapter 7 “Incorporation of foreign items of dress” (153-187), **Chapter 10 “Perserie: Athenian receptivity to Achaemenid Persian culture” (pp. 243-58). [ANCIENT HISTORY P 61 MIL – 2 copies] ▲Kuhrt, A. 1998 Review of Miller, in Phoenix 52: 366-70 [Online]. *Hoffmann, H. 1961. “The Persian origin of Attic rhyta”, Antike Kunst 4: 21-6 [Online] [Boardman, John. 2000. Persia and the West: an Archaeological Investigation of the Genesis of Achaemenid Art. London. {Rather turgid and not a great read, but an important study in terms of links between Achaemenid and Greek art, though emphasis mainly on Persian appropriations; very richly illustrated}.] Redfield, R; Linton, R; and Herskovitz, M.J. 1936. “Memorandum for the study of acculturation”, American Anthripologist 38: 149-52 [Online] Stewart, A.F. 1995. “Imag(in)ing the other: Amazons and ethnicity in fifth century Athens”, Poetics 16.4: 571-97. [Online]

Constructing the Classical: the Parthenon Sculptures in the British Museum – {JJT presentation/discussion} *Jenkins, Ian. 1992. Archaeologists and Aesthetes in the Sculpture Galleries of the British Museum. London. *Chapter 4 (56-74) “The chain of art”,* Chapter 5 (74-101) “Arcadia in Bloomsbury: the Elgin and the Phigaleian marbles”, Chapter 10 “The chain is broken”. Leoussi, Athena. 2001. “Myths of ancestry”, Nations and Nationalism 7: 467-486 Prettejohn, Elizabeth. 2012. The Modernity of Ancient Sculpture. London. Chapter 1 (38-103) “The discovery of Greek sculpture”.

Late fifth century

Bassai Frieze – student presentation 6.2 Room 16 ▲Jenkins, Ian. 2006. Greek Architecture and its Sculpture. London: British Museum Press. Chapter 6 (130-150) “The temple of Apollo Epikourios at Bassai”. YATES K 37 JEN Cooper, F.A. 1992. The Temple of Apollo Bassitas vol 2: The Sculpture. Princeton. ▲Osborne, Robin. 1994. “Framing the centaur: reading fifth century architectural sculpture”, in Simon Goldhill and Robin Osborne eds. Art and Text in Ancient Greek Culture. 52-84. ▲Jenkins, Ian and Williams, Dyfri. 1993. “The arrangement of the sculptured frieze from the temple of Apollo Epikourios at Bassae” in O. Palagia and W.D.E. Coulson eds. Sculpture from Arcadia and Laconia: Proceedings of an International Conference held at the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, April 10-14 1992. Oxford: Oxbow. 57-77 *Robertson, Martin. 1975. A History of Greek Art. Cambridge. 356-9 (Bassai frieze) *Ridgway, B.S. 1981. Fifth Century Styles in Greek Sculpture. Princeton. Pp. 94-6: “The Bassai frieze”.

Meidias Painter and late Fifth century vase-painting – student presentation 6.3 Room 19, Case 2. GR1772.2-20.30 = Meidias painter vase, main focus. MN also: GR1956.5-12.25: Aphrodite, Eros, Peiho, Eudaiomonia – manner of the Meidias painter. GR1895.10-29.2: Athenian pardise on a perfume vase – manner of the Meidias painter, ▲Burn, L. 1987. The Meidias Painter. Oxford. Key: 13-14 “Historical and intellectual background”, 15-25 “An attic paradise: the Meidias painter’s London hydria”, (26-44 “Aphrodite and her ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 28

associates”, if time, esp. 32-40 personifications), 94-6 “Conclusion”. [YATES QUARTOS P 30 BUR] ▲Borg, B. 2004. “Eunomia, or ‘Make Love not War’”, in E.J. Stafford, J. Herrin eds. Personification in the Greek World. 157-78. [CLASSICS GC 18 STA] ▲Lorenz, Katharina. 2006. “The anatomy of metalepsis: visuality turns round on a late fifth century pot”, 116- 143 in Simon Goldhill and Robin Osborne eds. Rethinking Revolutions through Ancient Greece. [PDF downloadable from Lorenz’s AcademiaEdu page] [ANCIENT HISTORY P 72 GOL] Kalkanis, Emmanouil. 2013. “The Meidias hydria: a visual and textual journey of a Greek vase in the history of art of antiquity, ca 1770s-1840s”, Journal of Art Historiography 9: 37pp. [Online] {on the history of collecting etc; not key for presentation, but quite interesting} Kousser, R. 2004. “The world of Aphrodite in the late fifth century BC”, 97-112 in C. Marconi ed. Greek Vases: Images, Contexts and Controversies. Leiden. Shapiro, H.A. 2009. “Alcibiades: the politics of personal style”, 236-64 in Olga Palagia ed. Art in Athens during the Peloponnesian War. Cambridge. [ANCHIST P14 PAL]

Supplementary reading on late fifth century art and broader historical and cultural context *Csapo , Eric. 1999. “Later Euripidean music”, Illinois Classical Studies 399-426 [Online] Barker, A. 1984. Greek Musical Writings I: The Musician and his Art. Cambridge. {Chapter on late 5th century Music} D’Anagour, Armand. 2006. “The new music – so what’s new?”, 264-283 in Simon Goldhill and Robin Osborne eds. Rethinking Revolutions through Ancient Greece. Cambridge. Anderson, Warren D. 1994. Music and Musicians in Ancient Greece. Chapter 5 on musical revolution (cf. Zeuxis and Parrhasios) Vickers, Michael. 1985. “Persepolis, Vitruvius and the Erechtheum caryatids: the iconography of Medism and servitude”, Revue Archéologique 1: 3-28 Onians, John. 1988. Bearers of Meaning: the Classical Orders in Antiquity, the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Cambridge. 8-22 “Classical Greece” (esp, for shift from regional to ethnic connotations of Doric and Ionic in fifth century; Erechtheum). Hurwit, J. 1977. “Image and frame in Greek art”, AJA 81: 1-30. Connor, W.R. 1993. “The Ionian era of Athenian civic identity”, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 137.2: 194-206 [Online] {looking mainly at archaic period, rather than later revitalisation of Athenian ionic identity}

Essay topic: Either: Is the concept of ‘period style’ a helpful one in approaching Greek art in the second half of the fifth century BC? Or: What can an analysis of the Parthenon sculptures tell us about the character, sources and significance of ‘style’. Or: How important is the role of ethnic identity to the history of classical art in the fifth century BC?

ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 29

7. DEATH AND COMMEMORATION IN THE FOURTH CENTURY

Topic Outline: How did Greeks in the fourth century make use of visual art in funerary commemoration? What relationship is there between the character of funerary art and mortuary practices, whether the rites of passage associated with funerals (liminality), or ongoing practices such as grave visiting and tending tombs? How far can recover the emotional and personal meanings of death through such art? What are the commonalities and differences that we find in visual practices of funeral commemoration that we find in different regions of the Greek world (Attica, Southern Italy, Lycia/Caria) and how can we explain them. How far can we identify a common culture of funerary commemoration? How far is this inflected by variant regional traditions, and practices of cultural hybridity on the margins of the Greek world? How far do different social and political structures affect the purposes of funerary commemoration, from the mourning the dead and consoling the bereaved, to celebrating ancestry and consolidating dynasty. How can we character the ‘agency’ of funerary art in different contexts? Materials to look at: 1. Fourth century attic funerary sculpture 2. The Nereid Monument Xanthos; 3. The Mausoleum of Halicarnassus. 4. South Italian Vase Paintings; 5. Attic white ground lekythoi .

Key readings required for in class discussion: 1. Leader, R. (1997). In Death Not Divided: Gender, Family and State on Classical Athenian Grave Stelae. American Journal of Archaeology, 101: 683 - 699. [Online] 2. Tanner, Jeremy. 2013. “Figuring out death: sculpture and agency at the Mausoleum of Halicarnassus and the Tomb of the First Emperor of China”, 58-87 in Liana Chua and Mark Elliot eds. Distributed Objects: Meaning and Mattering after Alfred Gell. Oxford: Berghahn. [Online – ebook] 3. Shapiro, H.A. 1991. “The iconography of mourning in Athenian art”, American Journal of Archaeology 95.4: 629-56. [Online] 4. Garland, Robert. 1985. The Greek Way of Death, chapter 7, pp. 104-120 “Visiting the tomb”. (Whole book probably best short introduction to Greek death). [ IoA Teaching Collection 3793 – 2 copies; ANCIENT HISTORY P 74 GAR – 2 copies] 5. Closterman, W. 2007. “Family ideology and family history: the function of funerary markers in classical Athenian peribolos tombs”, American Journal of Archaeology 111: 633-52 [Online] 6. Tarlow, Sarah. 2000. “Emotion in archaeology”, Current Anthropology 41.5: 713-746 [Online; Tarlows essay ends p. 730, but interesting to read the comments also if you have time] 7. Boulter, G. 1963. “Graves in Lenormant street Athens”, Hesperia 32.2: 113-137. [Online] {Does not need reading, just skim through to look at drawings of graves, and the plates which show the grave goods tomb by tomb; text is just catalogue list}

Basics: Osborne, Robin. 1988. “Death revisited, death revised. The death of the artist in archaic and classical Greece”, Art History 11: 1-6. [Online] Kurtz, Donna C. and Boardman, J. 1971. Greek Burial Customs. London: Thames and Hudson. (Still best source for basics of archaeology of burial in Greek world, nb 91-141 “Classical period”, 142-60 “Funeral rites, 200-218 “Grave markers and monuments”.) [YATES K47 KUR – 3 copies]

Comparisons and Theoretical inspiration Aries, P. 1989. Images of Man and Death. Harvard. ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 30

Panofsky, Erwin. 1964. Tomb Sculpture: its Changing Aspects from Ancient Egypt to Bernini. London: Phaidon Tarlow, S. 1999. Bereavement and Commemoration. Oxford: Blackwell Lewllyn, N. 1991. The Art of Death: Visual Culture in the English Death Ritual, ca 1500-1800. London: Reaktion Books. Hallam, E. and Hockey, J. 2001. Death, Memory and Material Culture. Oxford: Berg Stroebe, M., M.Gergen, K.J. Gergen and W. Stroebe. 1992. “Broken hearts or broken bonds: love and death in historical perspective”, American Psychologists 47: 1205-1212

Mausoleum: Student presentation 7.1 Room 21 Jeppesen, K. 2002. “Were images of ancestors represented in the Maussolleion at Halikarnassos”, 43-48 in Hojte, J.M. 2002. 'Images of Ancestors'. Aarhus UP (ANCIENT HISTORY M 6 HOJ) Carstens, Anne Marie. 2002. “Tomb cult on the Halicarnassus Peninsula” American Journal of Archaeology 106.3: 391-409. [Online] ▲Jenkins, Ian. 2006. Greek Architecture and its Sculpture. London: British Museum. Chapter 9, pp. 203-235 “The Mausoleum of Halicarnassus”. [YATES K 37 JEN – also will be a copy on issue desk] ▲Jeppesen, K. 1994. "Founder Cult and Maussolleion." In Hekatomnid Caria and the Ionian Renaissance, edited by J. Isager, 73-84. [YATES Qto E82 CAR] ▲Ashmole, B. 1972. Architect and Sculptor in Classical Greece. London: Phaidon. Pp. 147-92 "The tomb of Mausolus". [YATES QUARTOS K 5 ASH – 2 copies; ISSUE DESK IOA ASH 8; Main Library: ART FA 20 ASH] *Hornblower, , S. 1982. Mausolus. Esp. pp. 223-74 "The Mausoleum." (IoA TC 664) Waywell, G.B. 1978. The Free-Standing Sculptures of the Mausoleum at Halicarnassus in the British Museum: A Catalogue. *Cook, B.F. 1989. "The sculptors of the Mausoleum friezes", pp. 31-42 in Architecture and Society in Hekatomnid Caria. Proceedings of the Uppsala Symposium 1987, ed. T. Linders and P. Heilstrom. [Higgs in Palagia]

Nereid monument: Student Presentation 7.2 Bruns-Özgan, C. 1987. Lykische Grabreliefs des 5. und 4. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. Tübingen. Childs, W.A.P. and P. Demargne. 1989. Fouilles de Xanthos VIII: Le Monument des Néréides. Le décor Sculpté. Paris. Demargne, P. 1976. "L'iconographie dynastique au monument des Néréides de Xanthos." Receuil André Plassart 81-95. Paris. ______. 1979. "Le décor sculpté des monuments funérarires de Xanthos: principes explicatifs d'un art grec au service d'une ideologie orientale. Méthodologie iconographique." Actes du Colloque de Strasbourg. Université des Sciences Humaines de Strasbourg. Travaux du Centre de Recherche sur le Proche-Orient et la Grèce antique 6. *Childs, W.A.P. 1978. The City Reliefs of Lycia. Pp. 12-13, 22-31, 85-106 (xerox on teaching collection - "The Nereid Monument at Xanthos - Selections from Childs' City Reliefs.) Main Library TC 858 _____. 1981. "Lycian relations with Persians and Greeks in the fifth and fourth centuries reexamined." Anatolian Studies 31, 55-80 Bommelaer, J.F. 1986. "Sur le monument des Néréides et sur quelques principes de l'analyse architecturale." Bulletin de Correspondance Hellenique 110, 249-71 Martin, P. 1971. "Le monument des néréides et l'architecture funéraire", Révue Archeologique 327-37 *Lethaby, W.R. 1915. "The Nereid monument re-examined." Journal of Hellenic Studies XXXV, 208- 24 (TM Main Library 883) ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 31

*Barringer, J.M. 1995. Divine Escorts: Nereids in Archaic and Classical Art, pp. 59-66 "The Nereid monument". Jenkins, Ian. . 2006. Greek Architecture and its Sculpture. London: British Museum. Chapter 8, pp. 196-202 “The Nereid Monument”. [YATES K 37 JEN – also will be a copy on issue desk]

Classical Attic sculpted grave monuments: student presentation 7.3 Rooms 19-20. Turner, Susanne. 2012. “In cold blood: athletes in classical Athens”, World Archaeology 44.2: 217-33. [Online] ▲Johansen, K.F. 1951. The Attic Grave-Reliefs of the Classical Period. Esp. pp. 13-52 "The representations of classical attic grave-reliefs", 53-64 "Problems of interpretation: previous theories", 146-165 "The classical attic grave-reliefs considered in the light of their predeccessors." [YATES M 117 FRI; ICS: 131K.1] ▲Oliver, G. (2000). Athenian Funerary Monuments: Style, Grandeur and Cost. In G. Oliver (Ed.), The Epigraphy of Death (pp. 59 - 80). Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. [YATES M117 OLI; ANCIENT HISTORY W 75 OLI] ▲Neer, Richard. 2010. The Emergence of the Classical Style in Greek Sculpture. Chicago. Chapter 5, pp. 183-214 “Space and politics”. (Looking at relief style on funerary stelai) [YATES QUARTOS M 25 NEE] ▲Clairmont, C.1970. Gravestone and Epigram.: Greek Memorials from the Archaic and Classical Period. Esp. pp. 41-71 "Classical Period: introduction", and Catalogue numbers 24, 25, 59, 77 (all in the BM) [YATES QUARTOS M 117 CLA] *_____. 1993. Classical Attic Tombstones: Introductory Volume. Pp. 19-29 "Age groups on tombstones and family relationships", 30-37 "Dress, coiffures, footwear", 38-46 "Form and decoration of tombstones", 116-90 "Interpretation". NB to read with the plate volumes alongside the text. [YATES M 117 CLA] Osborne, R. (1997). Law, the Democratic Citizen and the Representation of Women in Classical Athens. Past and Present, 155, pp. 3 - 33. [Online] Nielsen, T.H., Bjertrup, L., Hansen, M.H., Rubenstein, L. & Vestergard, T. (1989). Athenian Grave Monuments and Social Class. Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, 30, pp. 41 1-420. [Online] Neer, Richard. 2002. “Space and politics: on the earliest classical Athenian gravestones”, Apollo 156 (July 2002): 20-27 [Davies, G.M. 1985. “The significance of the handshake motif in Classical funerary art”, AJA 89: 627- 40.] Younger, J. 2002. “Women in relief. Double consciousness in classical attic tombstones”. In Among Women: from the Homosocial to the Homoerotic in the Ancient World. Ed. N. Rabinowitz and L. Auanger. 167-210. Austin Morris, I. 1992. Death Ritual and Social Structure in Classical Antiquity, 128-155 "Monuments and the Dead: Display and Wealth in Classical Antiquity". (ANC HIST M55 MOR – 6 copies) Hagemajer-Allen, K. 2003. “Becoming the ‘other’: attitudes and practices at Attic cemeteries”, in C. Dougherty and L. Kurke eds. The Cultures within Ancient Greek Culture. Cambridge. 207-36 Himmelmann, N. 2000. “Quotations of images of gods and heroes on Attic grave reliefs of the late classical period”, in G. Tsetskhladze, A.J.W. Prag and A.M. Snodgrass eds. Periplous: Papers on Classical Art and Archaeology Presented to Sir John Boardman. Oxford. 136-44. Pemberton, "The Dexiosis on Attic Gravestones," MeditArch 2 (1989) 45-50 IoA Pers

Italian Red-figure Funerary Vases {JJT to introduce} ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 32

(Focus on Apulian Funerary vases, esp. Darius Painter, 2 vases in case 74; Ilioupersis Painter, 4 vases in case 73).

Basics Trendall, A.D. 1989. Red Figure Vases of South Italy and Sicily. London: Thames and Hudson. 74-156 “Apulian”, 255-69 “Myth and reality”

Funerary ▲Cambitoglou, Alexander. 1986. Le Peintre de Darius et son Milieu. Geneva. [ICS 132H CAM] ▲Giuliani, Luca. 1995. Tragic, Trauer und Trost. Bildervasen für eine apulischer Totenfeier. Berlin. ▲Denoyelle, Martine and Mario Iozzo. 2009. La Céramique Grecque d’Italie meriodionale et de Sicilie. Paris: Picard. Chapter 7, 137-63 “Le triomphe du style orné apulien (vers 370-300 av. J.-C.)”. [YATES Qto P5 DEN] Gaifman, Milette. 2012. Aniconism in Greek Antiquity. Oxford. Pp.262-269 on the Ruvo Vase, by Varrese Painter, depicting race between Oinomaos and Pelops (1843,0724.2; G73 dc 14) Giuliani, Luca. 2013. Image and Myth: a History of Pictorial Narration in Greek Art. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Chapter 6: “Images in the pull of the tex, from the fifth to the fourth century”. Frachhia, Helena. 2012. “Changing contexts and intent: the mourning Niobe motif from Lucania to Daunia”, 70-79 in B. Bundgaard-Rasmussen and St. Schierup eds. Red-figure pottery in its ancient settings. Copenhagen. 44-58 [YATES P30 SCH] *Giuliani, Luca. 1996. “Rhesus between dream and death: on the relation of image to text in Apulian vase painting”, BICS 41: 71-86 Gualtieri, Maurizio. 2012. “Late ‘Apulian’ red-figure vases in context: a case study”, 60-68 in B. Bundgaard-Rasmussen and St. Schierup eds. Red-figure pottery in its ancient settings. Copenhagen. [YATES P30 SCH] Lohmann, H. 1979. Grabmäler auf unteritalischen Vasen. Berlin. Pensa, Marina. 1977. Rappresentazioni dell’ oltretomba nella ceramic apula. Schauenburg, K. 1958. “Die Totengötter”, JdI 73: 48-78 _____. 1984. “Unterweltsbilder aus Grossgriechenland”, RM 91: 359-97 _____. 1878. “Tymboi auf unteritalischen Vasen”, RM 85: 83-90 Schmidt, M. et al. 1976. Eine Gruppe Apulischen Grabvasen in Basel. Smith, H.R.W. 1972. Funerary Symbolism in Apulian Vase-painting. Berkeley. [ICS 132G Copy 1; X St. 7 Copy 2 – Reference] {Nb looks like the most likely source, but check the various reviews on line and use with extreme caution}

Broader contexts of Apulian Painting Carpenter, T.H. et al. 2014. The Italic People of Ancient Apulia: New Evidence from Pottery for Workshops, Markets and Customs. Cambridge. [YATES A 30 CAR] MacDonald, B.R. 1981. “The emigration of potters from Athens in the late fifth century BC”, American Journal of Archaeology 85: 159-68 Trendall, A.D. 1985. “On the divergence of South Italian from Attic red-figured vase-painting”, 217- 30 in Greek Colonists and Native Populations. Proceedings of the First Australian Congress on Classical Archaeology. Sydney. Lohmann, H. 1982. “Zu technischer Besonderheiten apulischer Vasen” JDAI xvcii: 191-249

White ground lekythoi: Student presentation 7.4 Room 19, Case 2: there are several quite good examples here (Hypnos and Thanatos; wreath preparation and visit to the grave, and should be one or two more when returned from photography. Provide basics for focus, but you may wish to supplement with other pictures, which I can use tablet to display. For more examples see Room 20a, Case 15 = Greek Vases reserve collection, but unfortunately unlikely we can access these for class). ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 33

▲Oakley, J.H. 2004. Picturing Death in Classical Athens: the Evidence of White Ground Lekythoi. Cambridge. 1-18 “Introduction”, 215-231 “Putting the pictures into context”, plus s.v, index for themes of vases you chose to talk about ▲Sourvinou-Inwood, C. 1995. 1995. “Charon, Hermes and the journey of death”, in Reading Greek Death.Oxford. 303-361 (321-353 Images of Charon in white ground lekythoi) ▲Reilly, J. (1989). Many Brides: 'Mistress and Maid' on Athenian Lekythoi. Hesperia, 58, 41 1 - 444. [Online] *Koch-Brinkmann, U., 1999. Polychrome Bilder auf weissgrundigen Lekythen. Biering and Brinkmann. Munich. ▲Walton, M.S. et al. 2010. “Material evidence for the use of Attic white-ground lekythoi ceramics in cremation burials”, Journal of Archaeological Science 37: 936-40. [Online] *Morris, Ian. 1992. Death Ritual and Social Structure in Classical Antiquity. Cambridge. 108-118 “Grave goods in classical Athens” (looking specifically at deposition of white ground lekythoi; best read in context of entire chapter; pp. 103-127 "Taking it With You: Grave Goods and Athenian Democracy" *Kurtz, Donna. 1975. Athenian White Lekythoi. Oxford. _____. 1984. “Vases for the dead, an attic selection, 750-400 BC”, in H.A.G.. Brijder ed. Ancient Greek and Related Pottery. Amsterdam: Allard Pierson Museum. 314-28 [ISSUE DESK IOA INT 2] Baldassare, I. 1988. “Tomba e stele nelle lekythoi a fondo bianco”, AION ArchStAnt 10: 107-15 Bazant, J. 1986. “Entre le croyance et l’expérience: la mort sur les lécythes à fond blanc”, in Iconographie classique et identités regionales. 34-44. Paris. BCH sup vol. 14. Felten, F. 1976. “Weissgrundige lekythen aus dem Athener Kerameikos”, AthMitt 91: 77-113 Hoffmann, H. 1986. “From Charos to Charon: some notes on the human encounter with death in Attic red-figure vase-painting”, Visible Religion 4/5: 713-94 [Warburg Periodicals] Beazley, J.D. 1989. "Attic white lekythoi", pp. 26-38 in Greek Vases, Lectures by J.D. Beazley ed. D.C. Kurtz.

Essay question: “The study of emotions is a necessary part of any endeavour to look at the social and cultural aspects of the past” (Tarlow). How central was the expression of emotion to the uses and character of Greek funerary art?

ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 34

8. THE BODY AND NATURALISM: ISSUES OF GENDER AND SEXUALITY

Topic outline: What do we mean by naturalism? How far is the character of what we call ‘naturalism’ in Greek art shaped by issues of eroticism and sexuality? How far can we categorise the art we are looking at as ‘erotic art’, and how far is ‘the erotic’ being mobilised for other, non-erotic, purposes? Is eroticism in Greek art the goal of specific works or merely a tool, or merely a tool for other (social, political) purposes? How far do answers to the questions vary across media, for example sculpture versus vase-painting? To what extent does sexualised representation of women in ancient Greece correspond to that of modern west, as described by John Berger: objectification linked to patriarchy? How far do modern concepts - ‘the nude’, ‘heroic nudity’, ‘pornography’ – inflect our reading of and response to ancient art? To what extent are responses to nudity and eroticism immediately accessible to modern viewers, or how far are their manifestations in Greek art predicated on specifically Greek social and cultural practices, which mean that ancient responses would have been different than ours? By what means can we reconstruct ancient responses. How far do modern conceptions of the relationship between beauty and eroticism impede our understanding of, and response to, the aesthetic characteristics of Greek art?

Required reading for in class discussion: 1. Salomon, Nanette. 1997. “Making a world of difference: gender, asymmetry and the Greek nude”, 197-219 in A.O. Kolski-Ostrow and C.L. Lyons eds. Naked Truths: Women, Sexuality and Gender in Classical Art and Archaeology. London: Routledge. [YATES A 60 KOL; IoA Teaching Collection 3795 – 2 copies] 2. Osborne, Robin. 2007. “Sex, agency and history: the case of Athenian painted pottery”, in R. Osborne and J. Tanner eds. Art’s Agency and Art History. London. 179-198. [Online – ebook] 3. Darling, J.K. 1998/9. “Form and ideology: rethinking drapery”, Hephaistos 16/17,47-69. (ICS Stack 20; Xeroxes will be made available by JJT) 4. Crowther, N.B. 1985. “Male beauty contests in Greece: the euandria and the euexia”, Antiquité Classique 54: 285-91 [Online] 5. Osborne, R. 1997. “Men without clothes: heroic nakedness and Greek art”, Gender and History 9: 504-28. [Online] 6. Vout, Caroline. 2014. “Explicit intent” Apollo 66 (November) 66-71. [Online] {Very short think piece, reflecting comparatively on response to Japanese shunga and Greco-Roman ‘erotic art’ by modern viewers}

Theoretical perspectives: Berger, John. 1972. Ways of Seeing. London: BBC. Picture Essay 2, pp. 36-43; Essay 3, pp. 45-64. [ART BA BER – 3 copies; Science Library ANTHROPOLOGY E 10 BER – 4 copies] {Nb if you have not already read this classic essay, should certainly do so, and if you have please briefly review, since I will assume knowledge in class discussion: take as ‘Basic’ preliminary reading} Mulvey, Laura. “Visual pleasure and narrative cinema”, Screen 23.3: 74-87 Kappeler, S. 1986. The Pornography of Representation. Cambridge. Mirzoeff, N. 2002. The Visual Culture Reader, 2nd ed. Part 4: “The gaze, body and sexuality”, 593-676. Voss, Barbara L. 2008. “Sexuality studies in archaeology”, Annual Review of Anthropology 37: 317-36 [Online] Vout, Caroline. 2013. Sex on Show: Seeing the Erotic in Greece and Rome. London: British Museum. Pp. 59-75 “The Greek nude in context”, 100-108 “Greek sexhibitionism”. [YATES A60 VOU – 1 ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 35

copy; also a copy ordered for IoA ISSUE DESK] {Surprising how few of the key vase paintings on display – alas – but gives you a good idea of range of material in BM}

Nudity and sexuality in Greek art – general bibliography Osborne, R. 1998. “Sculpted men of Athens: masculinity and power in the field of vision”, 23-42 in L. Foxhall and J. Salmon eds. Thinking Men: Masculinity and its Self-Representation in the Classical Tradition. New York. Bahrani, Zainab. 1996. “The Hellenization of Ishtar: nudity, fetishism and the production of cultural differentiation”, Oxford Art Journal 19.2: 3-16 [Online] Bonfante, L. 1989. “Nudity as costume in Greek art”, American Journal of Archaeology 93: 543-70 Stewart, Andrew. 1997. Art, Desire and the Body in Ancient Greece. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hurwit, J.M. 2007. “The problem with Dexileos: heroic and other nudities in Greek Art”, American Journal of Archaeology 111: 35-60 Vout, Caroline. 2013. Sex on Show: Seeing the Erotic in Greece and Rome. London: British Museum Press. {Heavily illustrated with BM material, alas a lot off it still not on display – relic of ‘secret museum’ era}

Reading the nude male body in classical statuary: Student presentation 8.1 Room 23: Omphalos Apollo (= GR 1818.0801.1 ‘Apollo or Athlete’, 470/60 BC); Diadoumenos by Polykleitos (GR1870.0712.1 ‘Victorious athlete’, 440-30 BC; not on display 2018, but JJT will bring pictures) Tanner, J. “Social structure, cultural rationalisation and aesthetic judgement in classical Greece”, 183-205 in N.K. Rutter and B. Sparkes eds. Word and Image in Ancient Greece. ▲Steiner, Deborah. 1998. “Moving images: fifth century victor monuments and the athlete’s allure”, Classical Antiquity 17.1: 123-50 [Online] Crowther, N.B. 1985. “Male beauty contests in Greece: the euandria and the euexia”, Antiquité Classique 54: 285-91 [Online] _____ . 1991. “Euexia, eutaxia, philoponia: three contests of the Greek gymnasium”, ZPE 85: 301-4 [Online] ▲Metraux, G.P.R. 1995. Sculptors and Physicians in Fifth Century Greece. Montreal: McGill. 32-68 “Early classical statues” (largely on Omphalos Apollo), 91-99 “Conclusion” [YATES M 20 RIC] ▲Leftwich, G.V. “Polykleitos and Hippokratic medicine”, 38-51 in W.G. Moon ed. Polykleitos, the Doryphoros and Tradition. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. [YATES QUARTOS M 35 MOO] Ivo Jirasek, Geoffery Zain Kohe & Emanuel Hurych (2013) Reimagining athletic nudity: the sexualization of sport as a sign of a ‘porno-ization’ of culture, Sport in Society, 16:6, 721-734 [Online]

Sex and the Parthenon Frieze: Student Presentation 8.2 Room 18 ▲Younger, J.G. 1997. “Gender and sexuality in the Parthenon frieze”. 120-153 in A.O. Koloski- Ostrow and C.L. Lyons eds. Naked Truths: Women, Sexuality and Gender in Classical Art and Archaeology. London: Routledge. [YATES A 60 KOL – 1 copy; Institute of Classical Studies: 152J.1 – 2 copies] ▲Stewart, Andrew. Art, Desire and the Body in Ancient Greece. Cambridge. 75-85 “Eternal springtime” (homoeroticism on Parthenon frieze) [YATES QUARTOS A 60 STE; ISSUE DESK IOA STE 16] ▲Darling, J.K. 1998/9. “Form and ideology: rethinking drapery”, Hephaistos 16/17, 1998/99. (ICS Stack 20; Xeroxes will be made available by JJT) ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 36

▲Mark, Ira. 1984. “The gods on the East frieze of the Parthenon”, Hesperia 53: 289-342

Sex and the symposium in Greek vase painting:

Satyrs and maenads: Student Presentation 8.3 Lots of individual examples: ideally want to get a sense of the range and then focus in on some particularly interesting examples. Room 13, Case 8: GR1848.0629.5: Psykter by Lydos, 560-40 BC, Dionysos, satyrs and maenads. GR1842.4-7.22: Black figure amphora by the N painter – frieze showing dancing satyrs and maenads, GR1876.0328.5: Dionysiac scenes on kantharos with plastic donkey head attachment, ca 520-500 (JJT. For pictures of details, tablet). Room 15, Case 4: Red-figure krater by the Niobid Painter, satyr play & satyr and family, plus Pandora – GR1856.12-13.1. Case 6: Sphinx by Sotades (satyr on base); Cup signed by Brygos, Satyrs threaten Iris (on the exterior, difficult to see as displayed so I will bring pictures), G£1873.8- 20.376. Case 7: Psykter signed by Douris, ca 490 BC – GR 1868.6-6.7. Need to add bf. ▲Lissarague, Francois. 1990. “Why satyrs are good to represent”, in J.J. Winkler and F.I. Zeitlin eds. Nothing to do with Dionysos? Athenian Drama in its Social Context. Princeton. 228-36. [ ▲_____. 1990. “The sexual life of satyrs”, in F.I. Zeitlin, J.J. Winkler and D.M. Halperin eds. Before Sexuality. Princeton. 53-81 McNally, S. 1978. “The Maenad in early Greek art”, Arethusa 11: 101-35. *Hedreen, G.M. 1992. Silens in Attic Black Figure Vase-Painting: Myth and Performance. Ann Arbor Isler-Kerenyi, C. 2005. Civilizing Violence: Satyrs on Sixth Century Greek Vases. Göttingen. ▲Mitchell, Alexandre G. 2009. Greek Vase Painting and the Origins of Visual Humour. Cambridge. Chapter 4, pp. 150-234, “Satyrs and comic parody”. Simon, Erika. 1982. “Satyr-plays on vases in the time of Aeschylus”, 123-148 in Donna Kurtz and Brian Sparkes eds, The Eye of Greece: Studies in the Art of Athens. Cambridge. [YATES A6 KUR]

Reading sex in Greek vase-painting: {Presentation: JJT to introduce, with extra images – BM display rather limited} Room 15. Case 4: GR1848.6-19.7: red-figure cup by the Brygos painter, symposion, ca 490/80. Case 6 – pursuit scences from Brygos Tomb, by the Deepdene painter (Eos and Kephalos, NY Met. 18.74.1; Boreas and Oreithyia – Karsruhe 211. Case 7: Cup signed by Euphronios as potter – client with hetaira (exterior: Erymanthian boar) – GR1836.2-24.24. Shapiro, H.A. 1981. “Courtship scenes in Attic vase-painting”, American Journal of Archaeology 85: 133-43 ▲Sutton, R. 1992. “Pornography and persuasion on Attic pottery”, in A. Richlin ed. Pornography and Representation in Greece and Rome. Oxford. 3-35 ▲Lissarague, Francois. 1999. “Publicity and performance: kalos inscriptions in attic vase-painting”, in R. Osborne and S, Goldhill eds. Performance Culture and Athenian Democracy. Cambridge. 359-73 Shapiro, H.A. 1992. “Eros in love: pederasty and pornography in Greece”, in A. Richlin ed. Pornography and Representation in Greece and Rome. Oxford 53-72. Shapiro, H.A. 2000. “Leagros and Euphronios: painting pederasty in Athens”, 12-32 in T, Hubbard ed. Greek Love Reconsidered. New York. ▲Osborne, R. 1996. “Desiring women on Athenian pottery”, 65-80 in Natalie Kapmen ed. Sexuality in Ancient Art. Cambridge. Frontisi-Ducroux, Francois. 1996. “Eros, desire and the gaze”, 81-100 in Natalie Kapmen ed. Sexuality in Ancient Art. Cambridge. DeVries, K. 1997. “The ‘frigid eromenoi’ and their wooers revisited: a closer look at Greek homosexuality in vase-painting” in M. Duberman ed. Queer Representations: Reading Lives, Reading Cultures. New York. 12-24 ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 37

Slater, N.W. 1999. “The vase as ventriloquist: kalos-inscriptions and the culture of fame”, in E.A. MacKay ed. Signs of Orality: the Oral Tradition and its Influence in the Greek and Roman World. Leiden. 143-61. Vout, Caroline. 2013. Sex on Show: Seeing the Erotic in Greece and Rome. London: British Museum. Pp. 59-75 “The Greek nude in context”, 100-108 “Greek sexhbitionism”. {Surprising how little of this material on display – alas!}

Visions of Aphrodite:

Aphrodite of Knidos and Crouching Aphrodite: Student presentation 8.4 Room 23: Nearest we have for the Knidia is Townley Venus, but will do the drape the general issues around. She is in Room 23 along with the Crouching Venus. BM also has a version of the Aphrodite of Knidos (Capitoline Venus); I will bring a picture.

▲Corso, A. 1997. “The Cnidian Aphrodite” in Ian Jenkins and G. Waywell eds. Sculptors and Sculptures of Caria and the Dodecanese. London: 91-8. [YATES QUARTOS M 20 JEN] Allington, E. 1997. “Venus a go go, to go”, in A. Hughes and E. Ranfft eds. Sculpture and its Reproductions. Londom. 152-67. [ART C 20 HUG] {Extremely interesting piece on modern replications of classical statuary, if slightly tangential to this topic in itself} ▲Halperin, David. 1994. “Historicizing the sexual body: sexual preferences and erotic identities in the Pseudo-Lucian Erotes”, in J. Goldstein ed. Foucault and the Writing of History. Oxford. [HISTORY 6 A GOL; SSEES: Misc.V FOU] Montel, S. 2010. “The architectural setting of the Knidian Aphrodite”, in Amy Smith and S. Pickup eds. Brill’s Companion to Aphrodite. [On Order; Institute Classical Studies: 122D.1 – 2 copies] ▲Brinkerhoff, D.M. 1978/9. "Hypothesis on the history of the Crouching Aphrodite type in antiquity." Getty Museum Journal 6-7, 83-96 [Online] ▲Havelock, C.M. 1995. The Aphrodite of Knidos and Her Successors. 9-37, “Aphrodite of Knidos”, 80- 3 "Crouching Aphrodite." [YATES A6 HAV – 3 copies] Neumer-Pfau. W. 1985-6. “Die nackte Liebesgöttin: Aphroditestatuen als Verkörperung des Weiblichkeitsideals in der griechisch-hellenistischen Welt”, Visible Religion 4/5: 205-34 _____. 1982. Studien zur Ikonographie und geseelschaftlichen Funktion hellenistischer Aphrodite- Statuen. Bonn

Further reading:

Art: Boardman, John. 1992. “The phallos-bird in archaic and classical Greek art”, Revue Archéologique 1992.2: 227-43 Crawley-Quinn, J. 2007. “Herms, kouroi and the political anatomy of Athens”, Greece and Rome 54.1: 82-105 Johns, Catherine. 1982. Sex or Symbol? Erotic Images of Greece and Rome. London: British Museum Keuls, Eva C. 1985. The Reign of the Phallus: Sexual Politics in Ancient Athens. Berkeley: University of California Press. Kilmer, F.M. 1993. Greek Erotica on Attic Red-figure Vases. London: Duckworth. McNiven, Timothy.2012. Sex, gender and sexuality”, in Tyler Jo Smith and Dimitris Plantzos eds. A Companion to Greek Art. London: Blackwell. 510-524. [Online] Osborne, R. 1985. “The erection and the mutilation of the hermai”, in Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 25: 45-73 Stewart, A.F. 1996. “Reflections”, 136-154 in Natalie Kapmen ed. Sexuality in Ancient Art. Cambridge. (4th century mirrors) ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 38

Vermeule, C. 1969. “Some erotica in Boston”, Antike Kunst 12: 9-15.

Cultural and historical contexts: Bremmer, Jan. 1990. “Adolescents, symposion and pederasty”, in O. Murray ed. Sympotica: a Symposium on the Symposium. Oxford. 135-48 Konstan, David. 2015. Beauty: the Fortunes of an Ancient Greek Idea. Oxford. _____. 2013. “Beauty, love and art: the legacy of ancient Greece”, Schole 7.2: 325-337 [Online] McDonnell, M. 1992. “The introduction of athletic nudity: Thucydides, Plato and the vases”, Journal of Hellenic Studies 112: 182-93. Rosenzweig, Rachel, 2004. Worshipping Aphrodite: Art and Cult in Classical Athens. Ann Arbor: Michigan. [YATES A50 ROS] Scanlon, T.F. 2002. Eros in Greek Athletics. Oxford. Skinner, Marilyn. 2005. Sexuality in Greek and Roman Sculpture. Zeitlin, Froma. 1999. “Reflections on erotic desire in archaic and classical Greece”, in James I. Porter ed. Constructions of the Classical Body. Ann Arbor. 50-76

Collecting ancient ‘erotic’ art: Vout, Caroline. 2013. Sex on Show: Seeing the Erotic in Greece and Rome. London: British Museum. Chapter 6, “Desire for the antique”, with references, esp. on Secret Museum at Pompeii, also W. Davis on homosexuality and vase painting [YATES A60 VOU]

Essay question: Either: Is it the parallels or the differences between ancient and modern ‘art’ and ‘sexuality’ which present the greatest challenges in studying ‘art and sexuality’ in the ancient Greek world? Or: How far are sexuality and eroticism the primary issues at stake in depictions of nudity in ancient Greek art?

ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 39

9. PORTRAITS AND IDENTITIES IN THE HELLENISTIC WORLD

Topic outline: The history of portraiture in the Greek world has for a long time been understood in terms of the discovery of ‘the individual’ and ‘personality’, manifested above all in ‘realism’ of one kind or another, all seen as particularly characteristic of the Hellenistic world. The purpose of this class is to explore what might be meant by these concepts in relationship to practices of portraiture in the Hellenistic period, to think more carefully about the ways in which individual identities were constructed through distinctive portrait iconographies, and what the ways in which portraits representations were used and mobilised imply about the persons represented, and the relationship to them of the viewers of portraits. In addition to looking at important categories of portrait sculpture – ruler portraits, civic portraits, philosopher portraits – we will also look the material and institutional spaces occupied by portraits, from civic landscapes on the macro-scale to coins and faience jugs, used in ruler cult, on the micro-scale.

Basics: **Pollitt, J.J. 1986. Art in the Hellenistic Age. Cambridge. 19-46 “Royal iconography” (mainly on portraiture) 59-78 “Personality and psychology in portraiture”. Smith, R.R.R. 1991. Hellenistic Sculpture. Pp. 19-32 "Alexander and the kings", 33-50 "Philosophers, orators and poets"

Required reading for class discussion: 1. Smith, R.R.R. 1993. “Kings and philosophers”, in Images and Ideologies: Self-Definition in the Hellenistic World. Ed. A.W. Bulloch et al. Berkeley. 202-11. [ANCIENT HISTORY P 6 BUL; IoA teaching collection 3797 – 2 copies] 2. Tanner, J. 2007. “Portraits and agency: a comparative view”, 70-94 in R. Osborne and J. Tanner eds. Art’s Agency and Art History. Oxford: Blackwell. [Online – ebook] 3. Stewart, A. 1979. Attika: Studies in Athenian Sculpture of the Hellenistic Age, pp. 115-132 "Patterns of Patronage", 133-154 "Time and Style". [YATES M 50 STE – 4 copies, one reference] 4. Dillon, S. 2013. “Honorific portraits and the politics of space on Hellenistic Delos: portrait statue monument along the dromos”, American Journal of Archaeology 117.2: 207-46 [Online] 5. Henderson. John. 1996. “Seeing through Socrates: portrait of the philosopher in sculpture culture”, Art History 19.3: 327-52 [Online] 6. Stewart, Andrew. 2005. "Posidippus and the Truth in Sculpture" in K. Gutzwiller ed. The New Posidippus: a Hellenistic Poetry Book. Oxford. 183-205. [CLASSICS GV 15; IoA teaching collection 3796 – 2 copies] 7. Smith, R.R.R. 1988. Hellenistic Royal Portraits. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 14-31 “Functions of royal statues”. [ YATES QUARTOS M 215 SMI – 2 copies, one reference].

Theoretical contexts: Fowler, Chris. 2004. The Archaeology of Personhood: an Anthropological Approach. London: Routledge Brilliant, R.. 1971. "On Portraits". Zeitschrift fur Asthetik und allgemeine Kunst-Wissenschaft 16.1: 11- 26 Pointon, M. 2013. Portrayal and the Search for Identity. London: Reaktion. ART BC 30 POI. (Useful review by H. Grootenboer in Oxford Art Journal 2014).

Ruler portraits: ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 40

Royal portraits in the minor arts – coins and faience oinochoai: Student Presentation 9.1 Room 22 Case 2 and case 8. These coins are of module are rather small, and some more legible than others. If you let me know in advance which you wish to focus on I will try to ensure I have images to show people via tablet in order that they can be seen at larger scale. Fleischer, R. 1996. “Hellenistic royal iconography on coins” in Aspects of Hellenistic Kingship, ed. P. Bilde et al. Arhus. 28-39. [ANCIENT HISTORY P 17 BIL – 2 copies] ▲Kroll, J.H. “The emergence of ruler portraiture on early Hellenistic coins: the importance of being divine”, in P. Schultz and R, von den Hoff eds. Early Hellenistic Portraiture: Image, Style and Context. Cambridge. 113-122. [YATES QUARTOS M 215 SCH; will be moved to issue desk] ▲Sheedy, K.A. ed. Alexander and the Hellenistic kingdoms : coins, image and the creation of identity : the Westmoreland Collection. Australian Centre for Numismatic Studies, Macquarie University. Pp. 11-17 “Magically back to life: some thoughts on ancient coins and the study of Hellenistic royal portraits”. YATES QUARTOS R 20 SHE ▲Smith, R.R.R. 1988. Hellenistic Royal Portraits. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 46-53 “Royal images and kingship theory”. [ YATES QUARTOS M 215 SMI – 2 copies, one reference] ▲Thompson, D.B. 1968. Ptolemaic Oinochoai and Portraits in Faience. 10-18 “Technical aspects”, 23-38 “Relief decoration” (a general survey, you can skim through pretty quickly to pick up the features on the BM oinochoai), 49-77 “Cult affiliations” ; 78-101 “Portrait aspects” (esp. 78-84) ; 116-124 “The faience in its setting”. Catalogue nos 1, 87, 145, 270. Oxford. [YATES Qto P70 THO] Robert, L. 1966. “Sur un decret d’Ilion et sur un papyrus concernant des cultes royaux”, 176-211 (esp. 208-210, in Essays in honour of C. Bradford Wells. New Haven: American Society of Papyrologists. [PAPYROLOGY P 6 WEL] Thompson, D.B. 1975. “A numismatic commentary on the Ptolemaic cult oinochoai”, 251-6 in Greek Numismatics and Archaeology: Essays in Honour of Margaret Thompson. Ed. Otto Morkholm and Nancy M. Waggoner. [ICS 202]

Portraits of philosophers and intellectuals: Student presentation 9.2 Chrysippus and Epicurus or Antisthenes. Busts only in BM but JJT will bring pictures for the bodies.

▲Zanker, Paul. 1995. The Mask of Socrates: the Image of the Intellectual in Antiquity. Berkeley: University of California Press. Chapter 3, pp. 90-145 “The rigours of thinking”, esp. 96-113, 134-6 Chrysippus, 113-129 Epicurus. Frischer, B. 1982. The Sculpted Word: Philosophical Recruitment in Ancient Greece. Berkeley: University of California Press. ▲Frischer, B. 1983. "A Sociopsychological and Semiotic Analysis of Epicurus' Portrait", Arethusa 16, 247-265 (Online) ▲Richter, G.M.A. 1984. Portraits of the Greeks. (Ed. R.R.R. Smith), Chrysippos (pp. 103-8), Epikouros (pp. 116-119). Richter, G.M.A. 1965. The Portraits of the Greeks. Vol 2. London. Phaidon. 179-81 Antisthenes, 190-3 Chrysippos, 194-200 Epikouros. [YATES Qto M215 RIC] von den Hoff, Ralf. 1994. Philosophenporträts des Früh- und Hoch-Hellenismus. Munich. {with excellent bibliography up to that date, largely German}

Portraits of literary figures: Homer, Hesiod (?) etc: Zanker, Paul. 1995. The Mask of Socrates: the Image of the Intellectual in Antiquity. Berkeley: University of California Press. Chapter 4, 146-197 “In the shadow of the ancients”. Esp. 150- ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 41

4 ‘A peasant poet (Hesiod?), 158-171 (Cult of poets, and Homer), 194-7 (‘Man the reader’ and the Arundel Homer) Richter, G.M.A. 1965. The Portraits of the Greeks, Vol 2. London: Phaidon. [YATES Qto M215 RIC]. 45- 56 Homer; 56-66 Hesiod.

Civic portraits: Student presentation 9.3 {Demosthenes, Aeschines}

▲Richter, G.M.A. 1984. Portraits of the Greeks. (Ed. R.R.R. Smith), Aischines (73-5), Demosthenes (pp. 109-13). Richter, G.M.A. 1965. The Portraits of the Greeks. Vol 2: 212-215 Aischines; 215-224 Demosthenes. YATES Qto M215 RIC ▲Zanker, Paul. 1995. The Mask of Socrates: the Image of the Intellectual in Antiquity. Berkeley: University of California Press. Chapter 2, pp. 40-89 “The intellectual as good citizen”, esp. pp. 43-55 (Aeschines), 83-89 Demosthenes. ▲Von den Hoff, Ralf. 2007. "Naturalism and classicism: style and perception of early Hellenistic portraits", 49-62 in Peter Schultz and Ralf von den Hoff eds. Early Hellenistic Portraiture: Image, Style, Context. Cambridge.

Other reading Dillon, Sheila. 2010. Female Portraits in the Greek World. Cambridge. _____. 2007. “Portraits of women in the early Hellenistic period”, 63-83 in P. Schultz and R. von den Hoff eds. Early Hellenistic Portraiture: Image, Style, Context. Cambridge Ma , John. 2007.” Hellenistic Honorific Statues and Their Inscriptions”. In Art and Inscriptions in the Ancient World, edited by Z. Newby and R. Leader-Newby, 203–20. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. _____. 2013. Honorific Portraits and Civic Identity in the Hellenistic World. Oxford. Rather dense and detailed, but an important contribution to understanding civic portraiture. When reading, start with introduction and conclusion of each chapter, and avoid getting bogged down – endless exemplification can be skimmed. Particularly recommended: pp. 291-307 “Conclusion”, 243-265 “Making an honorific portrait”, 111-154 “Statues in their places”. Schefold, K. 1997. Die Bildnisse der antiken Dichter, Redner und Denker. 2nd ed. Basel. Stewart, A.. 2007. “Alexander, Philitas and the Skeletos: Poseidippos and the truth in early Hellenistic portraiture”, 123-138 in P. Schultz and R. von den Hoff eds. Early Hellenistic Portraiture: Image, Style, Context. Cambridge.

Essay topic: Why did people make portraits in the Hellenistic Greek world, and how are the purposes of portraits manifested in their material characteristics?

ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 42

10. ART AND MATERIALISM IN HELLENISTIC GREECE

Class outline: The Hellenistic world is characterised by the elaboration of luxury culture both at the top end of the social scale – above all in the courts of the Hellenistic kings – and further down the social scale through the mass-production and replication of elite art forms. We will look at material ranging from top-end gold-glass bowls and jewellery, through replication of precious metal plate in mould- made ceramics, and the intriguing phenomenon the mould-made terracotta figurines known as ‘Tanagras’, but produced in a number of centers in the Mediterranean, and consumed all over it. There are a number of issues for discussion: diffusion and emulation of elite artistic culture; issues of mass-production and replication and how that might transform the agency of both art-work and artist; issues of context – should these objects be interpreted primarily in terms of their find contexts (burials mostly), or are their other social and cultural contexts in which we can place them. How far can we – and should we seek to – place them in terms of a ‘history’ of art?

Required readings for class discussion:

1. Thompson, D.B. 1966. “The origin of Tanagras” American Journal of Archaeology 70.1: 51-63 [Online] 2. Bell, M. 1993. “Tanagras and the idea of type”, Harvard University Art Museums Bulletin 1.3: 39-53 [Online] 3. Williams, Dyfri. 1998. “Identifying Greek jewellers and goldsmiths”, 99-104 in idem ed. The Art of the Greek Goldsmith. London: British Museum Press. [YATES QUARTOS T 50 WIL; IoA teaching collection 3798 – 2 copies] 4. Rotroff, Susan I. 2007. “The introduction of the moldmade bowl revisited: tracking a Hellennistic innovation”, Hesperia 75.3: 357-78 [Online] {no need to get too bogged down in dating details; key issues are those of copying, replication etc, character and motivations} 5. Simmel, G. 1950 (ov 1908). "Adornment", pp. 338-344 in K. Wolff ed. The Sociology of Georg Simmel. (New York, The Free Press). (IoA TC 1793 - 2 copies) 6. Boardman, John. 1996. “The archaeology of jewelry”, 3-13 in Calinescu, A. ed. Ancient Jewelry and Archaeology. Bloomington and Indianapolis. ISSUE DESK IOA CAL ; IoA teaching collection 3799] 7. Laffineur, Robert. 1996. “Toward a definition of Mycenaean goldwork”, 89-116 Calinescu, A. ed. Ancient Jewelry and Archaeology. Bloomington and Indianapolis. [ISSUE DESK IOA CAL] {no need to get bogged down in detail of this: here just as a contrast case for thinking about how one might define characteristics of late classical/Hellenistic jewellery world}

Theoretical inspiration: {nb. G67 students reading these for class this week: so please read in time for this class as well, if possible, and reflect on what they might bring to the discussion; G67 Class 10 for a larger general bibliography on issues of ornament} Simmel, G. 1950 (ov 1908). "Adornment", pp. 338-344 in K. Wolff ed. The Sociology of Georg Simmel. (New York, The Free Press). (IoA TC 1793 - 2 copies) Rawson, J. 1984. Chinese Ornament: The Lotus and the Dragon, (New York, Holmes and Meier). Pp. 9-32 "Introduction" [excellent general account of the study of ornament] (IoA TC 1957 – 2 copies)

ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 43

The gilded world of Hellenistic Greece

Luxury tableware and its replications: student presentation 10.1 Focus on 1. Goldglass tableware; 2. Mouldmade vessels. Room 22, Case 10: Gold glass bowls: GR1871.5—18.11, GR 1871.5-18.3; Room 22, Case 4: Mould made Megarian bowls and , and gilded silver bowl with floral decoration – GR1989.7-24.1.

▲Harden, D.B. 1968. “The canosa group of Hellenistic glasses in the British Museum”, Journal of Glass Studies 10: 21-47. [Online] {nb just focus on the gold glass, not the mosaic vessels} ▲Rotroff, Susan I. 1982. “Silver, glass and clay evidence for the dating of Hellenistic luxury tableware”, Hesperia 51.3: 329-337. [Online] ▲ Rotroff, Susan I. 1982. ____. 2007. “The introduction of the moldmade bowl revisited: tracking a Hellennistic innovation”, Hesperia 75.3: 357-78 [Online] {no need to get too bogged down in dating details; key issues are those of copying, replication etc, character and motivations} Barr-Sharrar, Beryl. 1990. “Coroplast, potter and metalsmith”, 30-36 in J. Uhlenbrock ed. the Coroplast’s Art: Greek Terracottas of the Hellenistic World. New York [YATES Qto M150 UHL] Nb also Rotroff’s Agora exacavtions Volume on the Hellenistic Mould Made Wares Giuliani, Luca. 2013. Image and Myth: a History of Pictorial Narration in Greek Art. Chicago. 225-42 “Pictures for readers: the birth of the illustration in the second century”.

Hellenistic Jewellery: student presentation 10.2 Room 22, Case 5 Kyme Treasure. {Kyme treasure probably best focus, wide range of material, but feel free also to discuss other objects in the case. Cases 7 and 8 also have interesting material. If there are particular objects which you would like me to bring pictures of, e.g. rather small, let me know the references from Williams and Ogden and I will scan them so we can look at them on larger scale via tablet} ▲Williams, Dyfri. 2006. “Black-gloss calyx-krater decorated with wreaths, necklaces and earrings in gilded added clay”, 143-5 in Beth Cohen ed. The Colors of Clay: Special Techniques in Athenian Vases. Malibu: Getty. [YATES Qto P5 COH] {Nb this is in BM room: ▲_____. 1996. “The Kyme treasure” 117-129 in Calinescu, A. ed. Ancient Jewelry and Archaeology. Bloomington and Indianapolis. ISSUE DESK IOA CAL ▲Williams, Dyfri and Jack Ogden. 1994. Greek Gold: Jewellery of the Classical World. “Introduction” (pp. 10-46), Chapter 2, “The East Greek cities” (esp. pp. 92-104 ‘The Kyme treasture’; pp. 106-7: “Gold oak wreath with bee and two cicadas” [YATES T 50 WIL; YATES QUARTOS T 50 WIL] Williams, Dyfri. 1988. “Three groups of fourth century south Italian jewellery in the British Museum”, Römische Mitteilungen 95: 75-95 [IoA Pers] Williams, Dyfri. 2003. “Gilded pottery and golden jewellery”, 226-39 in O. Palagia and S.V. Tracy eds. The Macedonians in Athens. Oxford: Oxbow Books. [ANCIENT HISTORY Qto P16 PAL]

Jewellery, and luxury metalware in the Hellenistic World: General Bibliography

**Calinescu, A. ed. 1996. Ancient Jewelry and Archaeology. Bloomington and Indianapolis. [IoA ISSUE DESK – CAL] *Elsner, J. 2014. “Lithic poetics: Posidippus and his stones”, Ramus 43.2: 152-72 [Online] {very good bibl} Kuttner, A. (2005), ‘Cabinet Fit for a Queen: The Λιθικά as Posidippus’ Gem Museum’, in Gutzwiller (2005a), 141-63 The New Posidippus: A Hellenistic Poetry Book (Oxford) Fowler, B.H. 1989. The Hellenistic Aesthetic. Bristol: Bristol Classical Press. ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 44

Higgins, R.A. 1982. "Macedonian Jewellery", StHA 10 [1982] 140-51 [Online] {discusses some BM material} Higgins, R.A. 1980. Greek and Roman Jewellery. London (2nd edition) Jackson, Monica M. 2006. Hellenistic Gold Eros Jewellery: Technique, Style and Chronology. Oxford. BAR International Series 1510. [YATES Qto T20 JAC] Lapatin, Kenneth. 2015. Luxus; the Luxury Arts of Greece and Rome. Getty Museum. Rice, E.E. 1983. The Grand Procession of Ptolemy Philadelphus. Oxford. *Rudolph, Wolf. 1996. “Toward a historiography of jewellery research”, 17-25 in Calinescu, A. ed. Ancient Jewelry and Archaeology. Bloomington and Indianapolis. INST ARCH KF CAL Sgourou, Marina and Anagnostis P. Agelarakis. 2001. “Jewellery from Thasian graves”, Annual of the British School at Athens 96: 327-64. {Classical and Hellenistic} Tsigarida, Bettina. 2010. “A new gold myrtle wreath from central Macedonia in the collection of the Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki”, Annual of the British School at Athens 105: 305- 315. {excellent colour pictures, esp. enamelling} Williams, Dyfri and Jack Ogden. 1994. Greek Gold: Jewellery of the Classical World. “Introduction” (pp. 10-46), chapter 4 (pp. 199-221 “The Greek cities of South Italy and Sicily”, Williams, D. ed. 1998. The Art of the Greek Goldsmith. London.

Tanagras and the world of Hellenistic terracotta: replicating beauty and ugliness

Tanagra Images of Women: types and body language - student presentation 10.3 Room 22 Cases 4 and 7 ▲Dillon, Sheila. 2012. “Hellenistic Tanagra figurines”, 231-234 in Sharon L. James and Sheila Dillon eds. A Companion to Women in the Ancient World. London: Blackwell. [Online] ▲Masseglia, Jane. 2015. Body Language in Hellenistic Art and Society. Oxford. Chapter 3, pp. 122- 156, “The body language of the civic elite: women”. [IoA ISSUE DESK MAS 3] Lönnqvist, M. 1997, ‘Nulla signa sine argilla - Hellenistic Athens and the Message of the Tanagra Style’, in Frösén, J. (ed.) Early Hellenistic Athens, Symptoms of a Change, Papers and Monographs of the Finnish Institute at Athens, Vol. VI, 147-82. [ICS 118L FRO – JJT will make xerox available]

The Grotesque in Hellenistic terracottas: typology and body language – student presentation 10.4 Room 22, Case 6. ▲Garland, Robert. 1995. The Eye of the Beholder: Deformity and Disability in the Graeco-Roman World. London: Duckorth. Chapter 7, pp. 105-122 “Images of the deformed”. [CLASS A90 GAR] ▲Masseglia, Jane. 2015. Body Language in Hellenistic Art and Society. Oxford. Chapter 5, pp. 266- 299: “The body language of ‘Grotesques” [IoA ISSUE DESK MASS 3] Giuliani, L. 1987. "Die seligen Krüppel. Zur Deutung von Missgestalten in der hellenistischen Kleinkunst", Archäologischer Anzeiger (1987) 701-721.

Terracottas and Tanagras: general bibliography

Bailey, D.M. 2008, Catalogue of the terracottas in the British Museum, vol. IV, London. Bell, M. 1990, ‘Hellenistic Terracottas of Southern Italy and Sicily’, in Uhlenbrock, J. P. (ed.) The coroplast’s art, 64-70. Burn, L. and Higgins, R. 2001, Catalogue of the Greek Terracottas in the British Museum, vol. III, London. Graepler, D. 1997, Tonfiguren im Grab. Fundkontexte hellenistischer. Terrakotten aus der Nekropole von Tarent, München. ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 45

*Graepler D.. 2010, ‘Tanagras as funeral offerings: the example of Tarentum’, in Jeammet, V. (ed..) Tanagras. Figurines for life and eternity, 218-25. Higgins, Reynold. 1986. Tanagra and the Figurines. London. YATES M 160 HIG Jeammet, V. (dir.) 2003, Tanagra: Mythe et archéologie, Paris. _____. (ed.) 2007, Tanagras. De l’objet de collection à l’objet archéologique. Actes du colloque organisé par le Musée du Louvre à la Bibliothèque Nationale de France le 22 novembre 2003, Paris. [ICS 134B CON] _____. Ed. 2010, Tanagras: figurines for life and eternity: the Musée du Louvre's collection of Greek figurines, Paris. [YATES QUARTOS M 160 JEA] *Kingsley, B. M. 1981, ‘Coroplastic workshops at Taras. Marked moulds of the late classical period’ in The J. Paul Getty Museum Journal vol. 9, 41-52. Kleiner, G. 1942, Tanagrafiguren. Untersuchen zur hellenistischen Kunst und Geschichte,Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts, supp. 15, Berlin Mathieux, N. 2010. “Tanagras in Paris: a bourgeois dream”. In Tanagra: Figurines for Life and Eternity. (Musée du Louvre’s Collection of Greek Figurines). Paris: Louvre. 17-19 Nicholls, R.V. 1952. “Type, group and series: a reconsideration of some coroplastic fundamentals”, Annual of the British School at Athens 47: 217-226 [Online] {Not as such on Tanagras, but exploring some key issues} Tezgör, D. K. 2007, Tanagréennes d’ Alexandrie: figurines de terre cuite hellénistiques des nécropoles orientales, Cairo. _____. 2010, ‘Alexandria and Myrina’ in Jeammet, V. (dir.) 2010, Tanagras: figurines for life and eternity: the Musée du Louvre's collection of Greek figurines, 186-8. *Tezgör, D. K. and Abd'el Fattah, A. 1997, ‘La diffusion des Tanagréennes à l'époque hellénistique: A propos des quelques moules alexandrins’, in Muller, A. (ed.) Le moulage en terre cuite dans l'Antiquité: Création et production dérivée, fabrication et diffusion, 353-74. [ICS 127F.2C CON] *Uhlenbrock, J. P. (ed.) 1990, The coroplast's art: Greek terracottas of the Hellenistic world, New York. *_____. 1993, “The Study of Ancient Greek Terracottas: A Historiography of the Discipline”. Harvard University Art Museums Bulletin 1, No. 3, 7-27. [Online] Verhagen, K. 2012, Tanagras: a mystery unveiled? A material context study of terracotta figurines in late Classical, early Hellenistic Greece, Leiden, MA Dissertation. [Google and you can download it as PDF: excellent MA dissertation]

Disability and deformity in Hellenistic Terracottas:

R. Garland, 2010². The Eye of the Beholder. Deformity and Disability in the Graeco-Roman World, London B. Cohen (ed.), 2000. Not the Classical Ideal. Athens and the Construction of the Other in Greek Art, Leiden. Giuliani, L. 1987. "Die seligen Krüppel. Zur Deutung von Missgestalten in der hellenistischen Kleinkunst", Archäologischer Anzeiger (1987) 701-721. A. Mitchell, "Disparate Bodies in Ancient Artefacts: the Function of Caricature and Pathological Grotesque among Roman Terracotta Figurines", in Laes, Goodey, Rose (2013) 275-297. Disabilities in Roman Antiquity. Disparate Bodies A Capite ad Calcem, Leyden 2013.

Essay topic: How far is it possible to place such instances of Hellenistic ‘luxury’ consumption culture as jewellery and Tanagra figurines in a meaningful social and cultural context?

ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 46

ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 47

APPENDIX A: POLICIES AND PROCEDURES 2016-17 (PLEASE READ CAREFULLY)

This appendix provides a short précis of policies and procedures relating to courses. It is not a substitute for the full documentation, with which all students should become familiar. For full information on Institute policies and procedures, see see the IoA Student Administration section of Moodle: https://moodle.ucl.ac.uk/module/view.php?id=40867

For UCL policies and procedures, see the Academic Regulations and the UCL Academic Manual: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/srs/academic-regulations ; http://www.ucl.ac.uk/academic-manual/

GENERAL MATTERS ATTENDANCE: A minimum attendance of 70% is required. A register will be taken at each class. If you are unable to attend a class, please notify the lecturer by email. DYSLEXIA: If you have dyslexia or any other disability, please discuss with your lecturers whether there is any way in which they can help you. Students with dyslexia should indicate it on each coursework cover sheet.

COURSEWORK LATE SUBMISSION: Late submission will be penalized in accordance with current UCL regulations, unless formal permission for late submission has been granted. The UCL penalties are as follows:  The marks for coursework received up to two working days after the published date and time will incur a 10 percentage point deduction in marks (but no lower than the pass mark).  The marks for coursework received more than two working days and up to five working days after the published date and time will receive no more than the pass mark (40% for UG modules, 50% for PGT modules).  Work submitted more than five working days after the published date and time, but before the second week of the third term will receive a mark of zero but will be considered complete.

GRANTING OF EXTENSIONS: Please note that there are strict UCL-wide regulations with regard to the granting of extensions for coursework. You are reminded that Module Coordinators are not permitted to grant extensions. All requests for extensions must be submitted on a the appropriate UCL form, together with supporting documentation, via Judy Medrington’s office and will then be referred on for consideration. Please be aware that the grounds that are acceptable are limited. Those with long-term difficulties should contact UCL Student Disability Services to make special arrangements. Please see the IoA website for further information. Additional information is given here

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/srs/academic-manual/c4/extenuating-circumstances/

RETURN OF COURSEWORK AND RESUBMISSION: You should receive your marked coursework within one month of the submission deadline. If you do not receive your work within this period, or a written explanation, notify the Academic Administrator. When your marked essay is returned to you, return it to the Module Co-ordinator within two weeks. You must retain a copy of all coursework submitted. ARCL0162 Make/Mean Gk – handbook 2018/19 48

CITING OF SOURCES and AVOIDING PLAGIARISM: Coursework must be expressed in your own words, citing the exact source (author, date and page number; website address if applicable) of any ideas, information, diagrams, etc., that are taken from the work of others. This applies to all media (books, articles, websites, images, figures, etc.). Any direct quotations from the work of others must be indicated as such by being placed between quotation marks. Plagiarism is a very serious irregularity, which can carry heavy penalties. It is your responsibility to abide by requirements for presentation, referencing and avoidance of plagiarism. Make sure you understand definitions of plagiarism and the procedures and penalties as detailed in UCL regulations: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/current- students/guidelines/plagiarism

RESOURCES MOODLE: Please ensure you are signed up to the module on Moodle. For help with Moodle, please contact Tina Paphitis, Room 411a ([email protected]).